HEARINGS 


) 


BEFORE  THE 


OF  THE 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 


RELATING  TO 


THE  RECLAMATION  OF  THE  ARID  LANDS 
OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


A 


JANUARY  28  TO  FEBRUARY  9,  1901. 


GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE. 

1901. 


\X  *\  H 


CONTENTS 


\ 


*  '  '  ’  Page. 

Hearing  January  28,  1901 . . . . . . . . . .  5 

Statement  of  Hon.  F.  G.  Newlands,  of  Nevada. . . . .  5 

Statement  of  F.  H.  Newell,  hydrographer,  United  States  Geological 

Survey  _ _  . . . .... _ ’ . . . . .  20 

Statement  of  George  H.  Maxwell,  chairman  of  executive  committee  of 

National  Irrigation  Association _ _ _ _  ... _  31 

Hearing  January  31,  1901. .  _  _ _ _  _ _ _ _  37 

Statement  of  Nelson  H.  Darton,  geologist,  United  States  Geological 

Survey . . . . . .  37 

Statement  of  F.  H.  Newell,  hydrographer,  United  States  Geological 

Survey _ _  A  ....  ..IT. . .  . .  . . . .  43 

Statement  of  Hon.  Frank  W.  Mondell,  of  Wyoming  . . .  ..  61 

Hearing  February  7.  1901  (a.  m.) . .  . . . .  71 

Statement  of  Gifford  Pinchot,  chief  forester,  United  States  Department 

of  Agriculture . . . . . .  . . .  72 

Statement  of  Hon.  J.  F.  Wilson,  of  Arizona  _ _ _ _ _ _  74 

Statement  of  Hon.  Frank  W.  Mondell,  of  Wyoming _ .... _  81 

Statement  of  Hon.  F.  G.  Newlands,  of  Nevada . . .  85 

Statement  of  Elwood  Mead,  irrigation  expert,  United  States  Department 

of  Agriculture . . . . . . .  . .  88 

Hearing  February  7,  1901  (p.  in.) . .  ...  . .  .  93 

Statement  of  George  H.  Maxwell,  chairman  of  executive  committee  of 

National  Irrigation  Association  _ _ _ _ _ _  94 

Statement  of  Elwood  Mead,  irrigation  expert,  United  States  Department 

of  Agriculture. . . .  . . . . . . .  99 

Hearing  February  9,  1901 . . . . . . .  . . .  108 

Statement  of  George  H.  Maxwell,  chairman  of  executive  committee  of 
National  Irrigation  Association _ _ _ _ _ _ _  108 

3 


\> 


344432 


RECLAMATION  OF  THE  ARID  LANDS, 


Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands, 

House  of  Representatives, 

Washington,  D.  C.,  Monday ,  January  28,  1901. 

The  committee  met  at  10  o’clock  a.  m. 

Present,  Representatives  Tongue  (chairman),  Barham,  Jenkins, 
Ray,  Reeder,  Phillips,  Sutherland,  Wilson,  Gaston,  and  King. 

Present,  also,  Representatives  Newlands  and  Mondell. 

Also  Frederick  H.  Newell,  hydrographer  of  the  United  States  Geo¬ 
logical  Survey,  Washington,  D.  C.,  and  George  H.  Maxwell,  of  San 
Francisco,  Cal.,  chairman  of  the  executive  committee  of  the  National 
Irrigation  Association. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  FRANCIS  G.  NEWLANDS,  OF  NEVADA. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Gentlemen,  I  have  two  bills  pending  before  this 
committee  relating  to  the  reclamation  of  arid  lands.  One  of  those 
bills  (H.  R.  12844)  is  confined  entirely  to  the  State  of  Nevada  and 
embraces  only  one  river  in  that  State,  the  Humboldt  River,  stretching 
from  the  eastern  to  the  western  part  of  the  State — a  distance  of 
between  300  and  400  miles.  The  other  bill  is  a  general  bill  (H.  R. 
13846),  relating  to  the  reclamation  of  arid  lands  throughout  all  the 
arid  and  semiarid  States,  embracing  in  its  operations  thirteen  States 
and  three  Territories — nearly  one-third  of  the  entire  country. 

•  [H.  R.  12844,  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  second  session.] 

A  BILL  for  the  disposition  and  settlement  of  arid  lands,  and  for  the  construction  of  reservoirs 

and  necessary  hydraulic  works  for  the  storage  of  water  on  and  near  the  Humboldt  River, 

Nevada. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of 
America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  the  Geological  Survey  be.  and  it  is  hereby, 
directed  to  finish  surveys  and  prepare  specifications  for  the  complete  storage  and 
utilization  of  the  flood  and  excess  waters  of  Humboldt  River  in  the  State  of 
Nevada. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey  shall  make  a  report  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  as  to  each  reservoir,  diverting  canal,  or  other  hydraulic 
work,  showing  the  capacity  and  cost  of  construction,  also  the  location  of  the  public 
lands  to  be  reclaimed,  as  well  as  all  other  facts  relative  to  the  practicability  of  the 
utilization  of  the  flood  or  waste  waters. 

Sec.  3.  That  upon  the  filing  of  such  report,  or  completed  portions  thereof,  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  may,  in  his  discretion,  withdraw  from  public  entry  the 
lands  embraced  within  the  reservoir  site,  at  high-water  mark,  and  a  strip  of  land 
three  hundred  feet  in  width  bordering  the  same,  and  also  the  land  for  one  hundred 
feet  on  each  side  of  the  center  line  of  the  diverting  canals,  or  other  hydraulic 
works,  to  be  constructed  as  heretofore  noted,  together  with  the  public  lands 
which  it  is  proposed  to  irrigate  by  the  waters  held  in  the  reservoirs. 

Sec.  4.  That  for  the  construction  of  a  reservoir  on  Rock  Creek,  a  tributary  of 
Humboldt  River,  and  diverting  canals,  there  be,  and  the  same  hereby  is,  appro¬ 
priated  the  sum  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-six  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty 
dollars,  in  accordance  with  the  estimates  of  the  hydraulic  engineers  of  the  Geo- 

5 


6 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


logical  Survey,  reported  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  printed  in  Part  Four 
of  the  Twentieth  Annual  Report  of  said  Survey. 

Sec.  5.  That  for  the  construction  of  the  lower  Humboldt  reservoirs  and 
hydraulic  works  there  be,  and  the  same  hereby  is,  appropriated,  out  of  any  money 
in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  the  sum  of  one  hundred  and  forty- 
eight  thousand  three  hundred  dollars,  as  estimated  by  the  hydraulic  engineers  in 
the  respect  above  named. 

Sec.  6.  That  upon  the  completion  of  each  irrigation  project  hereby  specified,  or 
hereafter  authorized,  the  public  lands  to  be  irrigated  hereby  shall  be  subject  to 
homestead  entry,  after  notice  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  upon  the  conditions 
that,  in  addition  to  the  requirements  of  the  homestead  Act,  the  entryman,  upon 
the  making  of  the  final  proof  of  settlement,  shall  pay  to  the  Government  the  sum 
of  two  dollars  and  fifty  cents  per  acre,  and  enter  upon  an  agreement  to  make  fur¬ 
ther  payment,  extending  over  a  term  of  not  to  exceed  ten  years,  aggregating  seven 
dollars  and  fifty  cents  per  acre,  this  being  in  consideration  for  the  use  of  the  stored 
water  for  the  irrigation  of  said  land.  And  each  entryman  shall  be  limited  to  the 
entry  and  settlement  of  forty  acres. 

Sec.  7.  That  in  case  the  reservoirs  constructed  furnish  more  water  than  is 
needed  for  the  reclamation  of  the  public  land,  or  if  land  in  private  ownership  is 
found  better  situated  for  the  utilization  of  the  stored  waters,  then  the  right  to  use 
such  water  may  be  sold,  as  hereinafter  provided,  at  the  rate  of  ten  dollars  per 
acre,  payment  to  extend  over  a  period  not  to  exceed  ten  years.  The  amount  of 
water  to  be  thus  furnished  to  the  land  from  the  storage  reservoirs  is  not  to  exceed 
two  acre-feet  for  each  acre  of  land,  this  quantity  to  be  measured  at  the  head  of  the 
canal,  or  ditch,  diverting  the  water  from  the  reservoir,  or  from  the  natural  chan¬ 
nel,  if  the  latter  is  used  in  part  for  the  conveyance  of  the  water. 

Sec.  8.  That  the  rights  to  the  use  of  this  stored  water  to  the  amount  above 
limited  shall  be  appurtenant  to  the  land  for  which  such  rights  are  obtained,  and 
shall  not  be  transferable  to  other  lands,  but  shall  be  forfeited  if  not  put  to  bene¬ 
ficial  use. 

Sec.  9.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  hereby  authorized  to  make  suitable 
rules  and  regulations  for  the  enforcing  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

[H.  R.  13846,  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  second  session.] 

A  BILL  to  authorize  the  construction  of  reservoirs  for  the  storage  of  water  and  for  other 

hydraulic  works  for  the  reclamation  of  the  public  lands  within  the  arid  and  semiarid  land 

States  and  Territories. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States 
of  America  in  Congress  assembled l,  That  all  moneys  received  from  the  sale  and 
disposal  of  public  lands  in  the  arid  and  semiarid  States  and  Territories  beginning 
with  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  thirtieth,  nineteen  hundred  and  one,  excepting 
those  set  aside  by  law  for  educational  purposes,  shall  be  reserved  and  set  aside  for 
the  creation  of  a  fund  in  the  Treasury,  to  be  known  as  the  “  arid  land  reclamation 
fund,”  for  the  construction  of  reservoirs  and  other  hydraulic  works  for  the  stor¬ 
age  and  diversion  of  water  for  the  irrigation  and  reclamation  of  arid  lands. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  by  means  of  the  Director  of  the 
Geological  Survey,  be,  and  hereby  is,  directed  to  continue  the  examination  of  that 
portion  of  the  arid  region  of  the  United  States  where  agriculture  is  carried  on  by 
means  of  irrigation  as  to  the  advantages  for  the  storage  of  water  for  irrigating 
purposes,  of  the  practicability  of  constructing  reservoirs,  together  with  the 
capacity  of  the  streams  and  the  cost  of  construction  and  capacity  of  reservoirs, 
and  such  other  facts  as  bear  on  the  question  of  storage  of  water  for  irrigating 
purposes  as  required  by  the  Act  approved  March  twentieth,  eighteen  hundred  and 
eighty-eight,  and  also  to  investigate  the  practicability  of  diverting  large  rivers  by 
means  of  tunnels  or  other  works,  and  of  providing  supplies  by  means  of  artesian 
wells. 

Sec.  3.  That  the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey  shall  from  time  to  time 
make  reports  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  as  to  each  of  various  proposed  reser¬ 
voirs,  diverting  canals,  or  other  methods  of  procuring  water,  said  reports  to  show 
the  location,  cost  of  construction,  quantity,  and  location  of  such  land  as  can  be 
irrigated,  as  well  as  the  other  facts  relative  to  the  practicability  of  the  enterprise. 

Sec.  4.  That  upon  the  filing  of  such  report  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may,  in 
his  discretion,  withdraw  from  public  entry  the  lands  required  for  reservoir  or 
other  hydraulic  works,  together  with  the  public  lands  which  it  is  proposed  to 
irrigate  from  such  works. 

Sec.  5.  That  upon  the  determination  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  that  each 
of  the  said  projects  of  reclamation  is  practicable  he  shall  cause  to  be  let,  upon 
proper  public  notice,  contracts  for  the  construction  of  the  same,  in  whole  or  in 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


7 

part,  payments  to  be  made  from  the  arid  land  reclamation  fund:  Provided,  That 
no  such  contract  shall  be  let  until  the  necessary  funds  are  available:  And  provided 
•  further,  That  in  all  construction  work  eight  hours  shall  constitute  a  day’s  work 
and  none  but  citizen  labor  shall  be  employed. 

Sec.  6.  That  upon  the  completion  of  each  irrigation  project,  the  total  cost  thereof  / 
shall  be  ascertained  and  the  amount  divided  pro  rata  per  acre  of  the  lands  to  be  / 
irrigated  thereby,  and  that  said  amount  shall  be  made  a  charge  against  the  lands 
as  the  cost  of  a  right  to  the  use  of  water  from  said  system  of  irrigation,  and  that 
said  public  lands  shall  be  subject  to  homestead  entry,  after  notice  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior,  upon  the  condition  that  in  addition  to  the  requirements  of  the  home¬ 
stead  Act  the  entryman  shall  make  payment  to  the  Government  of  the'  cost  per 
acre  of  water  right  as  above  ascertained,  said  payment  to  be  made  in  not  to 
exceed  ten  annual  installments,  and  each  entryman  shall  be  limited  to  the  entry 
and  settlement  of  eighty  acres,  or  such  lesser  amount  as  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  may  designate,  and  the  moneys  thus  received  shall  be  covered  into  the 
arid  land  reclamation  fund:  Provided  further,  That  the  right  to  the  use  of  the 
water  shall  be  perpetually  appurtenant  to  the  land  irrigated,  and  beneficial  use 
shall  be  the  basis,  the  measure,  and  the  limit  of  the  right. 

Sec.  7.  That  in  case  the  water  thus  provided  shall  be  more  than  sufficient  for 
the  reclamation  of  the  public  lands,  or  if  land  in  private  ownership  has  been : 
found  by  the  survey  above  authorized  to  be  better  suited  for  the  utilization  of  the  \ 
stored  or  divided  waters,  or  if  there  is  a  sufficiency  for  both,  then  the  right  to  use  ) 
such  water  may  be  sold  at  the  rate  as  above  ascertained  and  under  the  same  terms; 
but  no  water  right  shall  be  granted  to  any  landowner  or  occupant  for  an  amount 
exceeding  eighty  acres.  The  proceeds  of  such  sales  shall  be  covered  into  the  arid 
land  reclamation  fund. 

Sec.  8.  That  the  following  shall  be  considered  as  arid  land  and  semiarid  land 
States  and  Territories  within  the  meaning  of  this  Act:  Arizona,  California,  Colo¬ 
rado,  Idaho,  Kansas,  Montana,  Nebraska,  Nevada,  New  Mexico,  North  Dakota, 
Oklahoma,  Oregon,  South  Dakota,  Utah,  Washington,  Wyoming. 

Mr.  Barham.  W  ill  it  interrupt  you  if  I  ask  you  a  question  right 
there  as  to  your  first  bill  (H.  R.  12844)?  Does  that  bill  cover  or  include 
a  conrplete  watershed? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  the  other  is  a  general  bill.  The  bill  relating 
to  Nevada  simply  takes  up  the  Humboldt  River,  and  provides  for  the 
construction  of  two  reservoirs,  one  on  Rock  Creek,  a  tributary  of  that 
river,  and  the  other  just  adjoining  the  river,  taking  advantage  of  a 
natural  depression.  The  total  cost  of  these  two  enterprises  will  be 
something  over  $300,000.  The  bill  makes  an  appropriation  for  this 
amount.  It  provides  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  upon  making 
the  survey,  shall  determine  what  public  lands  are  subject  to  this 
storage  of  water  and  can  be  benefited  by  it;  it  provides  that  they  shall 
be  withdrawn  and  set  aside,  and  that  thev  can  be  entered  in  areas  of 
not  exceeding  80  acres,  subject  to  a  payment  of  $2.50  for  the  land  and 
$7.50  for  the  water  right. 

Mr.  Reeder.  I  have  noted  the  fact  that  the  average  size  of  irri¬ 
gation  farms  in  New  Mexico  is  something  less  than  7  acres.  My  own 
experience  is  that  a  man  will  have  no  use  for  80  acres  of  irrigated  land 
for  the  purpose  of  raising  crops. 

Mr.  Newlands.  The  unit  varies  according  to  the  locality.  As  you 
go  to  the  south,  where  you  can  cultivate  citrous  fruits  and  nuts,  and 
things  of  that  kind,  the  unit  of  entry  maybe  made  very  much  smaller. 
But  in  the  north,  where  you  rely  mainly  upon  alfalfa  and  products 
for  fattening  cattle,  I  think  the  unit  of  80  acres  is  about  right. 

Mr.  Reeder.  That  is  true. 

Mr.  Newlands.  In  the  second  bill  which  I  have  drawn  (H.  R.  13846), 
the  bill  for  general  reclamation,  it  is  provided  that  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior  may  determine  the  unit  of  entry  (not  exceeding  80  acres), 
so  that  he  can  adapt  the  unit  to  the  locality. 

My  bill  with  reference  to  the  Humboldt  River  (H.  R.  12844)  also 
provides,  as  to  lands  now  occupied,  that  water  rights  can  be  acquired 


8 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


upon  the  payment  of  $10  an  acre.  This  sum  is  equal  to  the  entire 
charge  for  Government  land,  inclusive  both  of  the  entry  and  the 
water  rights.  Remember,  it  is  $2.50  for  the  land  entry  and  $7.50  for 
the  water. 

Mr.  Barham.  That  gives  the  complete  water  right  for  all  time? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes,  sir;  subject,  however,  to  beneficial  use.  If 
the  water  is  not  used  it  becomes  forfeited.  That  has  now  become  one 
of  the  settled  doctrines  of  the  arid  region — that  title  depends  upon  use. 

Now  as  to  the  second  bill  (H.  R.  13846) : 

The  second  bill  relates  to  the  entire  country,  and,  in  my  judgment, 
it  meets  many  objections  which  have  been  urged  by  our  Eastern  and 
Southern  friends  against  a  scheme  of  national  importance. 

In  the  first  place,  let  me  say  something  uxjon  the  question  whether 
this  great  work  should  be  intrusted  to  the  United  States  Government, 
to  the  States,  or  to  private  enterprise. 

As  to  private  enterprise,  under  existing  laws  it  is  utterly  impossible 
to  make  reclamation,  for  the  reason  that  any  reclamation  scheme 
involves  a  very  large  expenditure  in  the  storage  of  water,  a  very  large 
expenditure  in  the  main  canals,  and  a  very  large  expenditure  in  the 
diverting  ditches,  and  it  is  absolutely  essential  to  obtain  the  control 
and  the  ownership  of  large  areas  of  land  in  order  to  make  a  storage 
and  reclamation  enterprise  profitable  or  even  compensatory  of  the 
expenditure  made. 

The  policy  of  the  Government  has  never  been  to  grant  large  tracts 
of  land  to  individuals  or  corporations.  The  whole  policy  of  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  has  been  against  land  monopoly  and  has  been  intended  to 
secure  homes  for  actual  settlers.  The  entire  West  was  settled  up 
under  the  preemption  and  the  homestead  laws.  It  was  found  that  the 
preemjition  law  was  subject  to  evasion;  that  it  enabled  people,  in  vio¬ 
lation  of  the  spirit  of  the  law,  to  acquire  control  of  considerable  areas 
of  land,  and  so  that  law  was  abandoned  and  we  now  rely  entirely 
upon  the  homestead  law.  The  latter  law  provides  that  a  man  must 
live  upon  a  tract  of  land  for  five  years  before  he  can  get  a  title  to  it, 
but  it  gives  him  the  right  to  commute,  after  a  residence  of  fourteen 
months  upon  the  land,  by  the  payment  of  $1.25  an  acre.  So  that 
unless  we  revolutionize  the  policy  of  the  country  as  to  land  monopo¬ 
lies,  we  must  concede  that  this  matter  can  not  be  intrusted  to  private 
capital. 

Now  as  to  State  control:  We  from  the  West  object  to  the  transfer 
of  the  arid  lands  to  the  States,  in  the  first  place  for  the  reason  that 
many  of  the  States  are  so  impoverished  that  they  would  be  unable  to 
undertake  any  great  work  of  this  kind,  and,  in  the  second  place,  for 
the  reason  that  they  rarely  exercise  a  trust  of  this  kind  providently. 
In  fact,  it  may  bo-saifl  that  they  never  exoroisp  iL^prmdduutJy 

Take  the  great  State  of  Texas,  which  owns  its  own  public  lands.  I 
think  it  is  generally  admitted  that  those  lands  have  been  improvi- 
dently  parted  with.  Five  millions  of  acres,  I  believe,  were  given  in 
one  grant  for  the  construction  of  a  State  capital,  or  something  of  that 
kind;  and  the  result  is  that  Texas,  in  the  near  future,  will  be  strug¬ 
gling  under  the  evils  of  land  monopoly,  and  there  will  be  a  general 
protest  against  it. 

In  California  we  find  that  the  land  grants  given  by  the  Mexican 
Government  have  operated  against  the  development  of  that  State — 
grants  involving  from  30  to  200,000  acres.  You  may  say  that  the 
owners  of  those  lands  will  find  it  to  their  interest  to  part  with  them, 
but  that  is  not  human  nature.  It  is  human  nature  to  hold  on  to  land. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


9 


The  result  is  that  these  grants  of  great  areas  of  land  in  California 
have  seriously  impeded  the  development  of  that  State.  The  tendency 
of  a  State  is,  just  as  soon  as  it  gets  a  grant,  to  try  to  get  rid  of  it  as| 
soon  as  possible  by  realizing  upon  it. 

Mr.  Barham.  And  the  same  thing  occurred  in  California  in  regard 
to  swamp  and  overflowed  lands. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  they  fell  into  the  hands  of  monopolists. 

The  Chairman.  The  same  thing  occurred  in  Oregon  as  to  the 
swamp  lands  there. 

Mr.  Newlands.  We  want  to  promote  a  policy  which  will  induce 
the  settlement  of  the  country  of  which  I  have  been  speaking  in  small 
tracts  for  homes — tracts  aggregating  in  area  not  more  than  80  acres; 
and  we  want  oftentimes  to  make  the  unit  of  entry  smaller  than  80 
acres,  according  to  the  character  of  the  cultivation,  the  climate,  and 
the  soil. 

What  objection  is  urged  against  us?  The  objection  in  the  East  is 
that  it  is  proposed  to  tax  the  entire  country  for  the  improvement  of  a 
section - 

Mr.  Barham.  One  moment,  before  you  get  to  that  question.  It  is 
an  important  one;  but  before  you  get  to  it  let  me  ask  you  this: 

Is  it  not  true  that  in  addition  to  what  you  have  said  we  have  to  deal 
with  the  interstate  navigable  streams,  which  a  State  could  not  by  any 
possibility  control? 

Mr.  Newlands.  That  is  true.  These  interstate  questions  also  pre¬ 
sent  themselves;  for  there  is  hardly  a  State  which  is  watered  by  a 
river  which  has  not  interstate  complications.  Take  the  State  of 
Nevada,  for  instance.  Three  out  of  its  four  rivers  have  their  source 
in  California. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Would  not  the  Federal  Government  meet  with  the 
same  embarrassment  on  the  other  side? 

Mr.  Newlands.  No;  because  the  operations  of  the  Federal  Gov¬ 
ernment,  of  course,  embrace  the  entire  Union.  Upon  the  other  hand, 
suppose  that  a  State  were  entering  upon  a  scheme  of  State  improve¬ 
ment.  It  certainly  could  not,  or,  at  all  events,  it  would  be  a  difficult 
question  as  to  whether  it  could,  erect  works  outside  of  the  State,  in  a 
neighboring  State,  probably  subject  to  the  taxation  of  that  State.  All 
these  embarrassments  would  arise  in  the  administration  of  a  scheme 
of  that  character,  and  would  form  an  obstruction  to  it.  But  beyond 
all  that,  I  want  to  place  particular  emphasis  upon  the  fact  that  a  State 
will  not  exercise  a  trust  of  this  character  wisely  and  providently.  I 
place  more  stress  upon  that  point  than  upon  anything  else. 

Recollect,  now,  that  we  already  have  this  United  States  Geological 
Survey.  It  has  been  in  operation  now  for  twenty-two  years.  It  has 
the  confidence  of  the  people.  It  has  a  corps  of  scientific  men  who  are 
unsurpassed  in  their  line,  and  those  men  have  made  studies  of  that 
entire  Western  country  for  the  last  twenty  years,  and  are  now  prepared 
to  undertake  this  work. 

Mr.  Barham.  I  want  to  make  this  suggestion  in  answer  to  the  ques¬ 
tion  suggested  by  Mr.  Jenkins.  The  Government  controls  the  bridg¬ 
ing  of  navigable  streams.  So,  upon  a  parity  of  reasoning,  the  Gov¬ 
ernment,  in  legislating  upon  this  subject,  would  also  control  the 
question  of  the  navigability  of  the  streams  to  the  extent  of  their  being 
affected  by  this  irrigation  scheme. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes,  Mr.  Barham;  but  that  has  relation,  of  course, 
to  existing  streams.  The  question  in  my  mind  was  as  to  whether  or 


10 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


not  the  Federal  Government  can  go  into  a  State  and  undertake  its 
development. 

Mr.  Barham.  That  will  raise  the  question  of  riparian  rights.  That 
is  probably  the  question  here. 

The  Chairman.  I  had  this  question  in  mind,  Mr.  Newlands;  it  is 
probably  the  same  as  that  raised  by  Judge  Jenkins.  The  owners 
along  the  banks  of  the  streams  are  entitled  to  the  flow  of  waters  in 
their  customary  channels.  Now,  has  the  Government  a  right  to  go 
above  that,  create  dams  and  reservoirs,  and  then  divert  the  water  from 
the  streams  out  over  the  public  lands,  so  as  to  prevent  its  flowing  in  its 
accustomed  channels,  and  so  take  away  a  vested  right  of  the  citizen? 

Mr.  Newlands.  That  would  possibly  be  a  question  under  the  doc¬ 
trine  of  riparian  rights. 

Mr.  Wilson.  I  think  I  can  answer  that  question,  so  far  as  most  of 
the  arid-land  States  are  concerned.  They  have,  in  their  State  consti¬ 
tutions,  abrogated  the  old  doctrine  of  ripaian  rights.  All  of  the  arid- 
land  States  have  done  that.  As  far  as  Idaho  is  concerned,  I  was  a 
member  of  the  convention  which  framed  its  constitution;  and  the  old 
doctrine  has  of  necessity  been  abrogated,  because  the  conditions 
existing  there  made  such  a  step  absolutely  essential  for  the  develop¬ 
ment  of  the  country.  So  that  it  is  no  longer  the  law  in  any  of  those 
States  that  a  stream  shall  flow  “undiminished  in  quantity  and  unde¬ 
filed  in  quality”  past  a  man’s  land.  It  can  all  be  appropriated  and 
diverted,  and  he  may  be  left  nothing  but  the  bare  channel.  That  is 
the  law  in  all  the  arid-land  States;  and  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  has  sustained  the  State  courts  in  upholding  that  provi¬ 
sion  of  the  State  constitutions. 

The  Chairman.  Our  State  (Oregon)  has  no  constitutional  provision 
of  the  kind. 

Mr.  Wilson.  But  most  of  your  State  is  not  arid.  That  is  the  reason 
for  that. 

Mr.  Barham.  California  follows  the  same  rule.  That  is  what  I 
wanted  to  get  before  this  committee,  because  it  is  a  continual  stum¬ 
bling-block  with  men  who  understand  the  old  English  common-law 
system  of  riparian  rights.  We  can  get  rid  of  that  difficulty  easily 
enough,  however,  in  the  arid-land  district.  That  was  the  point  I 
wanted  to  make. 

Mr.  Newlands.  There  are  some  of  these  States — I  imagine  Califor¬ 
nia  is  one  and  Oregon  is  another — which  have  not  as  yet  reached  the 
advanced  doctrine  of  the  intermountain  States.  Mr.  Wilson  states 
the  fact  regarding  those  States.  They  have  entirely  done  away  with 
this  doctrine  of  riparian  rights.  But  practically  the  question  will  not 
arise,  for,  recollect,  it  is  only  the  flood  waters  that  are  stored  in  these 
reservoirs;  and  in  most  of  the  arid-land  States  the  doctrine  is  now 
recognized  that  when  a  man  stores  water  he  is  entitled  to  take  it  out 
below,  using  the  stream  simply  as  a  channel  for  carrying  his  water, 
and  his  title  to  it  is  recognized.  Laws  to  that  effect  have  been  passed 
in  a  number  of  States. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  is  rather  a  question  in  my  mind  beyond  the  doc¬ 
trine  of  riparian  rights.  Of  course,  when  we  talk  about  riparian 
rights  we  ordinarily  refer  to  the  rights  of  a  party  on  a  stream  already 
in  existence.  Now,  we  are  making  quite  a  departure.  We  are  sug¬ 
gesting  the  idea  of  the  Federal  Government  going  into  a  State  and 
taking  possession  of  lands  there,  and  making  a  canal,  so  to  speak,  for 
the  purpose  of  conducting  water.  A  person  living  on  that  stream 
would  not  have  what  we  call  riparian  rights.  He  would  only  have 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


11 


wliat  might  he  called  statutory  rights.  Riparian  rights  are  common- 
law  rights. 

Mr.  Barham.  Belonging  to  the  State. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  They  may  belong  to  the  State,  and  individuals  may 
have  riparian  rights.  But  inasmuch  as  I  am  going  to  be  largely 
influenced  by  gentlemen  like  Mr.  Newlands  (who  lives  in  a  locality 
interested  in  this  matter,  and  who  has  had  large  experience  with  these 
questions),  I  want  to  see  whether  or  not  he  has  considered  what  I 
consider  the  fundamental  question  involved  in  this  matter,  which  is 
as  to  the  power  of  the  Federal  Government  and  the  power  of  the 
States — whether  it  would  be  necessary  to  unite  the  two,  or  whether 
the  Federal  Government  can  go  on  absolutely  independent  of  the 
States.  I  raise  that  question  here  because  I  am  going  to  ask  to  be 
excused  in  a  moment.  This  is  a  matter  in  which  I  am  greatty  inter¬ 
ested;  but  we  want  to  prepare  amendments  on  several  District  bills 
which  we  hope  to  get  up. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Will  you  allow  me  to  pass  the  question  which  3^011 
have  raised  for  a  moment,  so  that  I  can  explain  the  provisions  of  this 
second  bill?  I  would  like  you  to  understand  it. 

This  second  general  bill  (H.  R.  13846)  is  intended  to  meet  the  objec-| 
tion  that  the  entire  country  is  to  be  taxed  for  the  improvement  of  al 
particular  section.  Of  course,  we  think  that  is  a  very  narrow  view,  but 
this  bill  is  intended  to  meet  it.  There  seems  to  be  a  general  disposi¬ 
tion,  on  the  part  of  those  who  oppose  the  Government  going  into  this 
work,  to  grant  these  lands  to  the  arid  States  and  let  them  settle  these 
complications  themselves.  We  are  opposed  to  that  course,  because 
we  want  the  Government  to  undertake  this  work. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Independent  of  3Tour  opposition,  it  would  not  be  either 
right  or  practicable  or  beneficial. 

Mr.  Newlands.  No;  now,  this  general  bill  (H.  R.  13846)  which  I 
present  provides  that  all  moneys  received  from  the  sale  of  public  lands 
in  the  arid  and  semiarid  States  shall  be  put  into  a  special  fund  in  the 
Treasiuy,  to  be  called  the  “arid-land  reclamation  fund.”  It  provides, 
then,  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  through  the  Geological  Sur- 
ve3T,  shall  make  plans  and  estimates  of  the  cost  and  the  feasibilit}7  of 
irrigation  schemes  through  the  arid  and  semiarid  States,  and  that 
wherever  the  Department  of  the  Interior  deems  a  plan  practicable  it 
shall  withdraw  the  lands  embraced  within  that  plan  from  the  general 
operation  of  the  land  laws.  It  then  provides  that  the  construction  of 
these  works  shall  be  commenced,  and  that  the  lands  subject  to  them 
shall  be  subject  to  entry,  under  the  homestead  law,  in  areas  not  exceed¬ 
ing  80  acres;  that  the  total  cost  of  each  project  shall  be  fastened  pro 
rata  upon  the  acreage  benefited  by  it,  and  that  that  total  cost  shall 
be  repaid  in  ten  annual  installments.  The  money  raised  in  this  man¬ 
ner  is  to  go  into  the  “arid-land  reclamation  fund,”  and  to  be  used 
over  and  over  again  in  other  enteiqn-ises  of  a  similar  character. 

This  bill  creates  a  revolving  fund,  derived  from  the  sale  of  public 
lands  in  the  region  that  will  be  reached  by  it.  The  plan  suggested 
will  be  self-operating;  in  fact,  almost  automatic.  It  will  require  no 
further  action  by  the  Congress  and  no  appropriation  from  the  Con¬ 
gress  except  the  devotion  of  these  moneys  to  this  particular  purpose. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  Does  the  bill  provide  for  a  S3rstem  of  artesian 
wells  for  experimental  purposes? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  it  provides  for  reservoirs,  for  the  diversion 
of  rivers,  and  also  for  artesian  wells,  as  a  part  of  the  project.  It  puts 
the  whole  thing  under  the  control  of  the  Secretaiy  of  the  Interior  and 


12 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey.  It  permits  the  Secretary, 
when  a  project  is  determined  to  be  feasible,  to  let  contracts  for  the 
construction,  either  in  whole  or  in  sections;  and  it  provides  that  no 
contract  shall  be  made  unless  the  money  for  its  payment  is  already  in 
this  fund.  It  also  provides,  as  to  lands  already  occupied,  that  if  there 
is  more  water  stored  than  is  sufficient  for  the  public  lands,  or  if  it  can 
be  used  more  conveniently  upon  lands  already  occupied,  water  rights 
can  there  be  granted  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior, 
subject  to  the  same  payments;  but  the  condition  is  made  that  he  shall 
not  grant  a  water  right  of  more  than  80  acres  to  any  one  person. 

As  you  see,  the  effect  of  that  provision  will  be  to  gradually  destroy 
the  existing  land  monopoly.  In  the  State  of  Nevada  we  have  a  land 
grant  of  2,000,000  acres,  given  by  the  General  Government  for  the 
school  fund  there.  That  land  has  been  most  improvidently  granted 
by  the  State;  and  the  result  is  that  the  whole  of  it  is  now  held  in  very 
large  tracts  by  individuals.  There  is  one  man,  in  one  of  the  richest 
valleys  on  the  Humboldt  River,  who  owns  14,000  acres — half  of  it 
acquired  under  the  school  grant  and  half  of  it  acquired  through  the 
railroad  grant.  These  lands  are  directly  on  the  river,  and  could  be 
divided  up  into  tracts  of  40  or  80  acres,  which  would  support  hundreds 
of  families. 

Suppose  this  reservoir  scheme  goes  through.  This  man,  of  course, 
would  like  to  get  from  the  General  Government  water  rights  for  his 
whole  14,000  acres.  He  could  not  do  it.  The  Government  says  to 
him,  “You  must  divide  up  your  territory  into  80-acre  farms;  then 
we  will  grant  each  one  of  those  men  a  water  right  for  80  acres,  upon 
the  payment  of  a  proportionate  part  of  the  entire  cost  in  ten  annual 
payments.”  Such  a  provision  does  no  injustice  to  the  landowner,  for 
the  very  presence  and  execution  and  completion  of  this  project  gives 
additional  value  to  his  land,  enabling  him  to  sell  it  at  a  better  price. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  not  a  large  quantity  of  these  lands  be  benefited 
by  the  fact  that  other  lands  around  them  are  improved? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Oh,  yes.  There  is  no  question  that  projects  of 
this  kind  would  increase  the  values  of  all  the  adjoining  lands  which 
are  in  private  occupancy,  because  there  is  certain  to  be  more  or  less 
seepage  or  percolation  of  water - 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Can  not  that  improvement  be  assessed  on  those  lands, 
just  as  in  the  case  of  street  improvements? 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  think  it  would  be  difficult  to  do  that;  but  I  do 
not  consider  it  necessary.  I  think  it  would  be  a  very  complicated 
matter. 

Mr.  Reeder.  It  would  be  almost  impossible  to  estimate  it. 

Mr.  Newlands.  This  bill  also  provides  that  moneys  received  from 
the  sale  of  public  lands  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1901,  shall 
go  into  this  fund.  That  fiscal  year  is  about  half  completed,  and  it 
would  provide,  I  think,  between  $1,000,000  and  $2,000,000.  The  pub¬ 
lic-land  sales  during  the  last  six  or  seven  years  have  ranged  from 
$804,000  in  1897  up  to  $2,836,000  in  1900. 

The  Chairman.  Does  your  bill  provide  for  putting  the  proceeds  of 
the  entire  sales  of  the  public  lands  into  this  fund? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  simply  in  the  arid  and  semiarid  States, 
however. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  You  make  no  direct  appropriation  as  a  begin¬ 
ning,  do  you? 

Mr.  Newlands.  No;  we  simply  dedicate  the  funds  that  have  been 
received  for  this  fiscal  year  to  this  fund,  and  those  moneys  form  the 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


13 


commencement  of  the  fund.  In  this  entire  arid  and  semiarid  region 
there  are  about  600,000,000  acres  of  land.  The  most  intelligent  esti¬ 
mate  is  that  the  total  amount  to  be  reclaimed  by  irrigation  will  not 
exceed  75,000,000  acres.  In  some  places  the  estimate  is  given  as 
100,000,000  acres,  but  I  think  75,000,000  acres  is  a  better  estimate. 
It  will  take  thirty  or  forty  years,  or  perhaps  fifty  years,  to  accomplish 
that.  So  it  means  simply  the  gradual  reclamation  of  these  lands.  In 
addition  to  that,  it  means  that  a  greater  value  will  be  given  to  the 
other  lands  which  are  now  used  as  pasture  lands. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  Do  I  understand  that  75,000,000  is  the  sum  total 
of  the  acres  of  land  out  of  the  600,000,000  that  could  possibly  be 
reclaimed,  in  all? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  in  all. 

Now,  what  do  we  say  as  to  the  525,000,000  acres  remaining?  That  is 
all  pasture  land,  mountain  land.  There  is  free  range  there  at  present. 
The  Government  gets  nothing  from  it.  The  result  of  the  improved 
cultivation  of  the  valleys  and  river  bottoms  will  be  that  there  will  be 
a  more  provident  system  of  cattle  and  sheep  raising  in  that  country. 
At  present  it  is  most  improvident,  because  the  cattle  and  sheep  range 
over  those  vast  areas  of  land,  and  when  a  terrific  snowstorm  comeson 
in  the  winter,  concealing  the  grasses,  they  perish  by  the  thousands. 
Now,  the  provident  system  of  cattle  raising  means  that  great  quanti¬ 
ties  of  hay  will  be  stored  in  the  valleys  just  for  such  purposes,  and  if 
the  agricultural  region  is  increased  in  that  wav  the  uasture  conditions 
will  vastly  improve,  and  some  method  will  be  devised  for  selling  or 
leasing  these  pasture  lands.  The  total  cash  receipts  from  the  disposal 
of  public  lands  during  each  fiscal  year,  from  July  1,  1895,  to  June  30, 
1900,  from  the  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  are  as  follows: 


1895  . $1,103,34? 

1896  . 1,005,523 

1897  . 864,581 


1898 . $1,243,129 

1899..  . 1,678,246 

1900 . 2,836,883 


Mr.  Jenkins.  I  understood  they  were  not  selling  public  lands  now. 
Am  I  wrong  in  that? 

Mr.  Wilson.  The  desert-land  law,  which  is  the  only  general  law 
now  on  the  statute  books  (besides  the  homestead  law)  authorizing  the 
disposition  of  public  lands,  provides  that  the  applicant  shall  pay  $1.25 
an  acre  for  the  land  after  reclaiming  it,  and  under  the  homestead 
law,  when  the  entryman  commutes  at  the  end  of  fourteen  months,  he 
pays  $1.25  an  acre.  In  a  great  many  States  where  Indian  reserva¬ 
tions  have  been  opened  there  have  been,  until  the  passage  of  the  free- 
homestead  law  last  session,  provisions  that  various  sums,  ranging 
from  $1.25  to  $3.75  an  acre,  should  be  paid  for  land.  It  is  from  these 
various  sources  that  this  money  comes.  The  homesteader  who  lives 
on  his  land  for  five  years  pays  nothing  for  it,  except  the  Land  Office 
fees.  A  great  many  of  them  commute.  A  man  who  wants  to  get  his 
title  before  that  time  does  this.  Judge  Jenkins  is  right  when  he  says 
that  the  homesteader  who  lives  on  his  land  five  }7ears  pajTs  nothing  for 
the  land.  All  of  the  others,  however,  do. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  understood  that  public  lands  were  not  now  for  sale. 

Mr.  Wilson.  They  are  not  for  sale;  they  are  not  sold.  You  know 
that  the  title  to  a  great  deal  of  land  in  the  arid  region  is  secured  through 
the  desert-land  law,  and  for  all  of  that  land  you  must  pay  $1.25  an 
acre.  That,  I  suppose,  amounts  to  a  great  many  hundreds  of  thou¬ 
sands  of  dollars. 

Mr.  Barham.  Then  your  scheme  would  include  the  expenditure  of 
about  $750,000,000  at  $10  an  acre? 


14  ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

/ 

Mr.  Newlands.  That  is  assuming  that  the  reclamation  will  cost  $10 
an  acre.  Much  of  it  costs  much  less. 

Mr.  Wilson.  But,  just  there,  a  great  many  millions  of  acres  will  be 
reclaimed  by  private  individuals  during  this  time.  For  instance, 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  in  each  State  are  continually  being 
reclaimed  by  private  individuals,  so  that  the  Government  will  never 
be  called  upon  to  expend  that  $750,000,000.  I  do  not  suppose  a  fourth 
of  it  will  be  expended. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Whatever  is  done  makes  no  difference,  because 
under  the  automatic  regulation  of  this  bill  we  simply  put  the  moneys 
received  from  the  sale  of  lands  into  the  reclamation  fund,  and  go  on 
with  more  work,  and  there  is  no  expense  to  the  Government. 

Mr.  Wilson.  A  question  with  regard  to  your  bill  before  you  sit 
down. 

The  law  now  provides  that  5  per  cent  of  the  receipts  for  the  sale  of 
public  lands  shall  go  to  the  States  for  school  purposes.  Of  course  we 
do  not  want  to  repeal  that  law. 

Mr.  Newlands.  No;  there»*is  also  a  bill  now  pending,  which  has 
passed  the  Senate,  wrhich  organizes  schools  of  mines  and  makes  those 
schools  of  mines  a  charge  upon  the  public-land  fund.  I  will  put  an 
exemption  in  the  bill  providing  that  all  moneys  received  from  the  sale 
of  lands,  except  those  devoted  to  educational  purposes,  should  be 
used  for  this  purpose.  That  exemption  would  include  this  5  per 
cent  of  which  you  speak. 

Mr.  Wilson.  To  illustrate  how  these  75,000,000  acres  will  never 
have  to  be  reclaimed  by  the  General  Government:  I  have  in  mind  an 
irrigation  system  where  I  live.  There  are  75,000  acres  under  the 
canal.  There  are  20,000  acres  under  cultivation — a  high  state  of  cul¬ 
tivation,  mostly  fruit  cultivation.  The  canal  has  been  constructed 
five  or  six  years,  but  it  is  being  enlarged  now,  so  that  that  canal 
would  undoubtedly  irrigate  the  whole  75,000  acres.  The  Govern¬ 
ment  will  never  be  called  upon  to  irrigate  an  acre  of  it.  In  fact  it 
would  not  be  permitted  to  do  so.  The  land  is  very  valuable.  So 
there  you  have  the  difference  between  20,000  and  75,000,  or  55,000 
acres  under  one  canal,  in  one  State,  that  would  be  taken  out.  I  sup¬ 
pose  there  are  a  great  many  instances  like  that. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Now,  I  want  to  say  one  word,  if  you  will  permit 
me,  about  the  State  of  Nevada  itself.  I  presume  what  I  say  with  ref¬ 
erence  to  it  will  illustrate  the  conditions  in  other  States. 

We  have  a  population  of  only  43,000.  Twenty  years  ago  we  had 
63,000.  It  is  not  generally  known  that  Nevada  has  produced  more  of  the 
precious  metals  than  any  other  State  of  the  Union.  Over  $600,000,000 
worth  of  precious  metals  have  been  produced  there;  but  the  profits 
received  from  the  mines  have  all  gone  out  of  the  State.  There  has  never 
been  organized  there  a  commercial  emporium  like  Salt  Lake  City  or 
Denver,  at  which  enterprises  could  be  conducted  throughout  the 
entire  State.  The  agricultural  interests  have  never  been  promoted. 
The  mining  interests  are  so  profitable  that  everything  in  the  State  is 
of  a  speculative  character;  and  when  the  mine  depression  came, 
through  the  fall  in  the  price  of  silver,  there  was  no  general,  equal, 
harmonious  development  in  the  State  that  could  withstand  the  effects 
of  that  depression.  So  that  we  must  now  take  hold  of  Nevada  and 
build  it  up,  and  we  must  start  with  the  basis  of  every  Commonwealth — 
agriculture. 

Now,  the  farmers  of  that  State  have  already  taken  up  the  lands 
adjoining  the  rivers.  It  does  not  cost  much  to  do  that.  They  simply 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


15 


dig  a  ditch  and  carry  the  water  over  the  adjacent  land  and  irrigate  it. 
But  the  measure  of  that  kind  of  cultivation  is  the  condition  of  the 
stream  at  its  very  lowest  flow,  instead  of  its  highest  flow,  and  the  low¬ 
est  flow  comes  at  the  time  when  water  is  most  needed — in  July  and 
August.  These  farms,  therefore,  are  very  limited,  and  wherever  any¬ 
body  else  now  takes  up  a  farm  and  proposes  to  water  it,  he  finds  an 
abundance  of  water  in  April,  May,  and  perhaps  in  June,  and  no  water 
at  all  at  the  time  when  it  is  most  needed.  So  that  it  is  utterly  impos¬ 
sible  to  continue  the  agricultural  development  of  Nevada  under  exist¬ 
ing  conditions. 

You  will  ask,  “  Is  there  water  that  can  be  secured  for  these  lands?  ” 
We  have  four  large  rivers — one,  the  Humboldt  River,  stretching  from 
the  eastern  part  of  the  State  to  the  western,  a  distance  of  about  400 
miles,  with  one  of  the  richest  valleys  in  the  world.  The  lower  part 
of  the  valley  is  as  rich  as  the  valley  of  the  Nile.  Wells  have  been 
dug  100  feet  deep  and  never  gotten  to  the  bottom  of  the  soil.  It  is  a 
rich,  alluvial  deposit  that  will  produce  everything. 

What  is  the  character  of  that  river?  It  is  a  torrent  in  the  latter 
part  of  March,  April,  and  May,  and  it  is  a  mere  thread  in  July, 
August,  and  September.  Where  do  those  waters  go?  They  flow  into 
a  sink  of  the  desert  called  Humboldt  Lake.  The  water  is  in  the  low¬ 
est  part  of  the  desert,  and  of  course  it  is  impossible  to  utilize  it, 
because  it  is  impracticable  to  lift  water  for  the  purpose  of  irrigating 
land.  Dependence  must  be  placed  upon  gravity. 

That  lake  measures  the  unutilized  water  of  the  river.  The  prob¬ 
lem  is  to  substitute  for  that  lake  artificial  lakes  at  the  sources  of  the 
tributaries  of  the  Humboldt  River  and  along  the  river  itself  in  natural 
depressions,  where  dams  can  be  inexpensively  constructed  and  the 
water  can  be  held  so  that  it  can  flow  by  gravity  to  these  lands  where 
it  is  most  required. 

The  other  three  rivers  of  which  I  have  spoken  take  their  source  in 
the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains,  which  are  the  source  of  the  great  rivers 
of  California  (the  Sacramento,  the  King  River,  and  the  San  Joaquin 
River) ;  but  their  waters  flow  to  the  east  instead  of  to  the  west,  as  the 
California  rivers  do.  The  California  rivers  flow  into  the  ocean  and 
lose  their  waters  there.  Our  waters  flow  into  great  lakes  in  the  sink 
of  the  desert,  and  there  is  at  the  foot  of  the  Truckee  River  a  lake  35 
or  40  miles  long,  10  or  15  miles  wide,  in  the  sink  of  the  desert,  which 
measures  the  unutilized  water  of  the  river.  There  is  at  the  foot  of 
the  Carson  River  a  similar  lake  called  Carson  Lake.  Then  there  is 
at  the  foot  of  the  Walker  River  a  similar  lake  called  Walker  Lake, 
an  immense  sheet  of  water,  and  so  on.  Storage  in  these  lakes  is  com¬ 
paratively  inexpensive.  The  whole  matter  has  been  investigated  at 
the  source  of  the  Truckee  River.  We  find  that  water  can  be  very 
inexpensively  stored  there,  and  that  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres 
can  be  brought  under  reclamation  if  it  is  so  stored. 

“Now,”  you  ask,  “why  is  it  not  done  by  private  enterprise?” 
The  people  of  the  Truckee  Valley  only  have  30,000  acres  under  cul¬ 
tivation.  They  are  prosperous,  but  still  they  are  only  small  farmers, 
having  160  acres  of  land  apiece.  They  are  unable  to  comprehend  a 
big  scheme  of  this  kind,  and  they  have  not  the  means  to  carry  it  out 
in  any  event.  Besides  that,  they  have  the  water  for  their  land,  and 
that  is  all  they  need.  Now,  we  want  to  enter  up  other  large  areas  of 
land  belonging  to  the  Government.  Who  is  to  do  it?  You  do  not 
want  to  make  a  grant  to  a  corporation  for  the  purpose  of  doing  it, 
because  that  tends  to  land  monopoly.  You  do  not  allow  individuals 


16 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


to  take  out  large  tracts,  for  that  tends  to  land  monopoly.  The  ques¬ 
tion  is  whether  it  is  not  the  obligation  and  the  dut}r  of  the  Govern¬ 
ment,  which  is  the  owner  of  this  land,  to  see  to  it  that  it  is  put  in 
condition  for  settlement.  You  survey  land  in  order  to  put  it  in  a 
condition  for  settlement.  If  it  is  necessary,  in  addition  to  that,  to 
survey  the  waters  that  supply  it;  is  not  that  a  governmental  duty  and 
obligation,  just  as  the  survey  of  the  land  is?  It  belongs  to  the  Gov¬ 
ernment.  It  is  an  obligation,  a  duty,  that  belongs  to  it  b}r  reason  of 
its  ownership.  Apart  from  its  governmental  capacity,  if  that  is  done, 
Nevada  will  advance,  and  everything  else  will  advance.  It  will  tend 
to  the  development  of  her  mineral  wealth.  As  it  is,  Nevada  has  a 
“black  eye.”  We  have  been  served  b}T  a  railroad  which  never  has 
made  an  effort  to  colonize  it.  Why?  Because  the  Central  Pacific 
Railroad  was  owned  by  the  promoters  of  the  Southern  Pacific.  The 
Southern  Pacific  was  a  through,  transcontinental  line,  and  they 
wanted  their  business  to  go  on  the  long  haul,  and  all  possible  busi¬ 
ness  was  diverted  to  the  Southern  Pacific.  Then  they  had  a  difficulty 
with  the  Federal  Government  upon  the  question  of  subsidy;  and  the 
result  of  the  discussion  was  that  the  popular  impression  was  created 
throughout  the  country  that  that  railroad  was  worthless,  and  that  the 
Government  ought  to  practically  give  it  away,  because  it  passed 
through  a  worthless  State.  Every  other  transcontinental  road  has 
been  the  colonizer  of  every  State  through  which  it  has  passed.  The 
road  was  built  first  and  the  country  settled  afterwards. 

We  regard  this  State,  in  effect,  as  a  railroad  “bridge”  from  Ogden 
to  California.  Now,  just  look  all  through  the  territory  to  the  north 
and  south.  What  do  you  find?  Seven  or  eight  intermountain  States 
or  Territories  whose  populations,  in  the  past  twenty  years,  have 
increased  threefold;  Nevada’s  population  has  diminished  one-third. 
Now,  nature  did  not  give  all  the  advantages  to  these  other  States  that 
surround  her.  Nevada  has  the  same  advantages.  The  whole  ques¬ 
tion  is  one  of  governmental  and  railroad  policy. 

Mr.  Wilson.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  Nevada  has  increased  wherever 
there  were  agricultural  settlements? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  Reno  is  now  the  leading  town  in  the  State, 
through  its  location  in  an  agricultural  country. 

Mr.  Barham.  In  other  words,  there  are  large  farms  where  alfalfa 
and  all  that  sort  of  thing  grow.  There  are  just  as  beautiful  agricul¬ 
tural  interests  there  as  any  in  the  world. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  ask  special  consideration  for  Nevada.  I  believe 
in  this  general  reclamation  scheme,  if  you  are  disposed  to  consider 
that,  but  I  ask  special  consideration  for  Nevada.  Recollect,  it  was 
pulled  into  the  Union  in  1864  against  its  will.  Its  people  rejected 
their  constitution  in  the  first  place.  They  did  not  feel  that  they  had 
a  population  sufficient  to  sustain  the  burden  of  statehood.  But  the 
patriotic  men  of  Washington  sent  telegrams  there,  as  did  the  Repub¬ 
lican  newspapers,  urging  them  that  it  was  a  patriotic  duty  on  their 
part  to  come  in  to  assist  in  reconstructing  legislation;  and  they  acqui¬ 
esced  and  came  in. 

Mr.  Barham.  Now,  I  would  like  to  have  your  opinion  on  this  prop¬ 
osition:  Does  not  your  bill,  after  all,  amount  to  an  appropriation  of 
public  funds,  because  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  these  lands  would 
go  into  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States?  What  I  want  to  get  at, 
then,  is  this:  Would  it  not  be  just  as  well  to  come  squarely  before 
the  people  and  say,  “We  propose  to  appropriate  enough  public  funds 
to  carry  out  this  project,  until  the  money  is  paid  back  into  the  Treas- 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


IT 


ury  of  the  United  States.  We  will  assess  these  lands  at  the  rate,  say, 
of  75  cents  or  $1  an  acre,  until  all  of  the  money  appropriated  to  carry 
out  this  great  scheme  has  been  repaid  to  the  Treasury,”  just  as  was 
done  in  the  case  of  the  Union,  Central,  and  Western  Pacific  railroads. 
What  I  mean  to  say  is,  why  do  we  not  go  right  square  at  the  proposi¬ 
tion,  and  say,  “Gentlemen,  here  is  what  the  people  want” — and  they 
do  want  it,  I  believe — instead  of  pretending  to  dodge  around  by  say¬ 
ing  that  “the  sale  of  the  arid  lands  is  going  to  pay  this  money;” 
because  they  will  understand  that  themselves.  Take  the  bull  squarely 
by  the  horns,  and  appropriate  the  money  out  of  the  Treasury  of  the 
U nited  States,  with  the  tax  of  so  much  an  acre,  sufficient  to  ultimately 
repay  the  Government,  and  let  whoever  uses  it — railroads,  private 
owners,  or  anybody  else — pay  75  cents  or  $1  an  acre.  Give  the  pref¬ 
erence  to  the  homesteader,  but  make  it  80  acres  to  the  settler. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Well,  I  doubt  whether  the  Government  could  enter 
upon  a  scheme  of  assessing  lands  in  the  States  for  local  improvements 
in  the  States. 

Mr.  Barham.  Now,  what  I  mean  is,  if  private  owners  or  railroads 
use  this  water,  they  should  pay  $1  an  acre  for  it. 

Mr.  Newlands.  If  they  use  it. 

Mr.  Barham.  If  they  use  it;  yes.  Now,  as  to  the  public  lands,  of 
course  we  can  make  any  rule  we  please  about  them.  Now,  why  not 
go  squarely  before  the  people  and  say:  “Yes,  it  will  develop  the  rail¬ 
road  lands;  it  will  develop  the  lands  of  the  State;  and  we  will  assess 
them  $1  an  acre,  or  75  cents  an  acre,  or  whatever  will  ultimately  repay 
the  Government?” 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  have  no  objection  to  that  at  all.  On  the  con¬ 
trary,  I  would  advocate  it;  and  I  have  a  bill — H.  R.  14072 — drawn  up 
on  that  basis — a  bill  after  the  pattern  of  the  river  and  harbor  bill — 
making  a  specific  appropriation  at  this  time  for  the  commencement  of 
projects  which  have  already  been  planned  and  estimated  upon  by  the 
Geological  Survey  and  providing  for  estimates  (as  in  the  case  of  the 
river  and  harbor  bill)  for  work  that  is  projected.  Each  member  of 
Congress  has  the  right  to  go  before  the  committee  and  present  his 
project,  and  ask  for  an  estimate  and  a  plan  regarding  it.  I  am  in 
favor  of  such  a  bill.  But  we  find  that  those  who  are  opposed  to  this 
scheme  of  the  Government  paying  out  moneys  for  the  reclamation  of 
lands  are  willing  to  grant  the  lands  to  the  States.  If  they  are  willing 
to  grant  the  lands  to  the  States,  they  ought  to  be  willing  to  set  aside 
the  proceeds  from  the  sales. 

[H.  R.  14072,  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  second  session.] 

A  BILL  For  the  construction  of  public  works  regulating  the  flow  of  the  rivers  of  the  arid  region 
of  the  United  States,  storing  the  water,  and  continuing  surveys. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of 
America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  the  following  sums  of  money  be,  and  are 
hereby,  appropriated,  to  be  paid  out  of  any  money  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise 
appropriated,  to  be  immediately  available  and  to  be  expended  under  the  direction 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  the  supervision  of  the  Director  of  the  Geolog¬ 
ical  Survey,  for  the  construction,  completion,  and  operation  of  the  storage  and 
reclamation  works  hereinafter  named  and  for  the  surveys  hereinafter  named. 

ARIZONA. 

Toward  the  construction  of  a  dam  and  reservoir  on  Gila  River,  Arizona,  near 
San  Carlos,  as  described  in  the  report  entitled  Water  Supply  Paper  Numbered 
Thirty-three,  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey,  one  hundred  and  fifty  thou¬ 
sand  dollars. 

11196—01 - 2 


18 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


CALIFORNIA. 

Toward  the  construction  of  dams  on  Kings  River,  at  the  locality  known  as 
Clarks  Valley,  as  described  in  Senate  Document  Numbered  Fifty-nine,  of  the 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  second  session,  fifty  thousand  dollars. 

Toward  the  construction  of  the  Hetch  Hetchy  Reservoir,  as  described  in  tho 
Twenty-first  Annual  Report,  Part  Four,  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey, 
page  four  hundred  and  sixty-five,  fifty  thousand  dollars. 

For  construction  of  a  reservoir  on  Clear  Lake,  California,  fifty  thousand  dollars. 

MONTANA. 

Toward  the  construction  of  the  nine  miles  of  diversion  canal  from  Saint  Mary 
River.  Montana,  as  described  in  the  report  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey, 
one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars. 

NEVADA. 

Toward  the  construction  of  a  reservoir  on  Rock  Creek,  Nevada,  as  described  in 
the  Twentieth  Annual  Report,  Part  Four,  United  States  Geological  Survey,  page 
four  hundred  and  forty-five,  thirty  thousand  dollars. 

Toward  the  construction  of  reservoirs  and  diversion  works  on  Humboldt  River, 
in  Nevada,  as  described  in  the  Twentieth  Annual  Report,  Part  Four,  United  States 
Geological  Survey,  forty  thousand  dollars. 

Toward  the  construction  of  reservoirs  on  the  Truckee  River,  in  California  and 
Nevada,  as  described  by  the  United  States  Geological  Survey,  eighty  thousand 
dollars. 

WYOMING. 

For  the  construction  of  a  reservoir  on  Grey  Bull  River,  Wyoming,  as  described 
by  the  United  States  Geological  Survey,  forty-nine  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
sixty-two  dollars. 

ARIZONA. 

For  surveying  sites  in  Arizona,  determining  amount  of  water  in  Gila  and  Salt 
rivers,  including  Santa  Cruz  River,  and  investigating  artesian  conditions,  six 
thousand  dollars. 

CALIFORNIA. 

For  surveys  in  northern  California  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Kings, 
Kern,  and  San  Joaquin  rivers,  ten  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  and  mapping  of  underground  waters  in  San  Joaquin  Val¬ 
ley,  California,  five  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  and  mapping  of  underground  waters  in  San  Bernardino 
Valley,  California,  five  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  of  the  country  adjacent  to  Colorado  River,  in  California 
and  Arizona,  and  estimates  of  cost  of  utilizing  the  Colorado  River  by  pumping  or 
by  gravity  canals,  eleven  thousand  dollars. 

COLORADO. 

For  surveys  in  Colorado  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Platte  River,  four 
thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  of  the  feasibility  of  storing  water  in  northeastern  Colorado, 
three  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  of  reservoir  sites  on  Arkansas  River  and  Rio  Grande,  in 
Colorado,  eight  thousand  dollars. 

For  reconnoissance  for  diversion  of  Gunnison  River,  in  southwestern  Colorado, 
five  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  of  underground  waters  and  drilling  test  well  in  eastern 
Colorado,  sixteen  thousand  dollars. 

IDAHO. 

For  a  survey  for  diversions  of  water  from  Snake  River,  Idaho,  and  obtaining 
underground  waters  on  Snake  River  plains,  five  thousand  dollars. 

For  examination  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Boise,  Weiser,  and  Payette 
rivers,  of  eastern  Idaho,  four  thousand  dollars. 

KANSAS. 

For  drilling  test  well  in  northwestern  Kansas,  sixteen  thousand  dollars. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


19 


MONTANA. 


For  the  continuation  of  the  Saint  Mary  River  surveys,  Montana,  seven  thousand 
dollars. 

For  the  continuation  of  the  Madison  River,  Helena  survey,  Montana,  five  thou¬ 
sand  dollars. 

For  the  diversion  of  waters  from  Yellowstone  River,  Montana,  eleven  thousand 
dollars. 

NEBRASKA. 


For  drilling 
dollars. 


test  well,  radjacent  to  southwestern  Nebraska,  fifteen  thousand 

NEVADA. 


For  the  continuation  of  reservoir  surveys  on  Carson,  Muddy,  Virgin,  and  Walker 
rivers.  Nevada,  ten  thousand  dollars. 

For  investigation  of  artesian  conditions  in  Lemon  and  Warm  Spring  and  other 
valleys  in  Nevada,  five  thousand  dollars. 

NEW  MEXICO. 


For  survey  of  reservoir  sites  on  Rio  Grande,  New  Mexico,  six  thousand  dollars. 


NORTH  DAKOTA. 


For  continuation  of  mapping  of  underground  waters  in  'North  Dakota,  three 
thousand  dollars. 


OREGON. 


For  continuation  of  examination  of  deep  waters  in  northwestern  Oregon,  four 
thousand  dollars. 

For  exploration  for  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Owyhee  and  Malheur 
rivers,  Oregon,  five  thousand  dollars. 


SOUTH  DAKOTA. 

For  the  investigation  of  deep  waters  in  western  part  of  South  Dakota,  drilling 
test  well,  fifteen  thousand  dollars. 

TEXAS. 

For  water  storage  in  trans-Pecos,  Texas,  five  thousand  dollars. 

UTAH. 


For  surveys  of  storage  reservoirs  on  the  Sevier  River,  four  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  of  head  waters  of  Provo  and  Weber  rivers,  Utah,  three 
thousand  dollars. 

For  reconnoissance  for  diversion  of  Grand  and  Green  rivers,  in  southeastern 
Utah,  five  thousand  dollars. 

WASHINGTON. 

For  surveys  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Yakima  River,  Washington, 
and  tributaries,  six  thousand  dollars. 

For  the  examination  of  artesian  conditions  of  central  Washington,  four  thou¬ 
sand  dollars. 

WYOMING. 


For  surveys  of  storage  and  diversion  of  Green  River,  Wyoming,  and  tributaries, 
six  thousand  dollars. 

For  surveys  for  conservation  of  water  on  North  Platte  River,  Wyoming,  four 
thousand  dollars. 


Mr.  Barham.  That  has  not  been  the  showing:  before  this  committee. 
I  have  been  here  for  six  years ;  and  while  nearly  every  one  of  us  was 
in  favor  of  granting  the  lands  to  the  States,  yet  the  people  take  the 
same  view  of  it  that  you  do — that  the  same  result  would  follow  as  was 
the  case  in  regard  to  the  California  land  grants  of  swamp  and  over- 


20 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


flowed  lands ;  and  these  men  would  ultimately  come  into  the  ownership 
of  large  tracts  of  land,  ruining  the  very  object  intended.  The  people 
are  not  in  favor  of  granting  the  land  to  the  State. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  am  not  talking  about  the  people.  I  am  talking 
about  objectors  in  Congress.  The  men  who  object  to  the  reclamation 
of  the  arid  lands  of  the  West  say,  “If  you  will  bring  in  a  bill  granting 
the  arid  lands  to  the  West,  we  will  acquiesce.” 

Very  well;  now,  I  reply  to  them,  “We  do  not  want  to  grant  all  the 
lands,  because  we  know  that  these  lands  will  be  improvidently  dis¬ 
posed  of.  We  want  you  to  hold  them,  but  we  want  you  to  turn  over 
the  proceeds  of  those  lands  (which  is  the  same  thing)  to  a  fund  for 
reclamation  purposes.”  Now,  I  admit  that  the  purpose  of  this  bill  is 
to  do  away  with  the  objection  which  is  urged  by  these  men — an  objec¬ 
tion  which  I  do  not  regard  as  reasonable. 

There  is  another  thing:  They  say,  “We  commence  to-day  with  an 
appropriation  of  one,  two,  three,  or  four  million  dollars.  How  do  we 
know  but  that  next  year,  or  five  years  from  now,  we  will  be  called 
upon  for  fifty  millions?  There  is  room  for  the  exercise  of  the  greatest 
imagination  about  it.”  But  this  bill  absolutely  limits  the  expendi¬ 
tures  to  the  amount  that  is  in  the  fund,  and  it  limits  the  fund  itself  to 
the  proceeds  of  these  lands;  so  that  it  absolutely  relieves  the  minds 
of  these  men  of  this  apprehension  of  the  commencement  of  a  great 
scheme  that  is  intended  to  tap  the  public  treasury  for  the  benefit  of  a 
particular  section. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  And  it  places  no  burden  upon  the  General  Gov¬ 
ernment  at  all? 

Mr.  Newlands.  It  places  no  burden  upon  the  General  Government 
at  all;  it  makes  it  simply  a  trustee  for  the  improvement  and  disposal 
of  these  lands. 

Mr.  Barham.  Do  you  not  think  the  people  understand  this  question 
quite  as  well  as  you  do? 

Mr.  Newlands.  No;  I  do  not  think  they  do  understand  it. 

Mr.  Barham.  Then  we  ought  to  educate  them. 

Mr.  Newlands.  We  have  been  working  upon  this  matter  now  for 
twenty  years,  and  so  far  we  never  have  gotten,  in  legislation,  the 
entering  wedge.  I  find  that  in  talking  to  many  members  of  Congress 
to-day  about  it  there  is  a  great  deal  of  ignorance  on  the  subject,  and 
more  inertia  and  a  general  disposition  to  wait.  Now,  gentlemen,  I  do 
not  want  to  wait  any  longer. 

I  would  be  very  glad  to  get  an  appropriation  such  as  you  suggest. 
I  think  it  is  a  good  way  of  proceeding — just  as  good  as  the  way  I  sug¬ 
gest.  But  I  claim  that  this  bill  will  accomplish  the  purpose  that  we 
want,  and  that  it  will  do  away  with  a  lot  of  the  objections  that  are 
presented  by  men  who  are  opposed  to  the  Government’s  entering  upon 
these  reclamation  schemes. 

(Authority  was  given  by  the  chairman  to  Mr.  Newlands  and  the 
other  speakers  to  extend  their  remarks  in  the  record.) 

STATEMENT  OE  FREDERICK  H.  NEWELL,  HYDROGRAPHER, 
UNITED  STATES  GEOLOGICAL  SURVEY. 

pffMr.  Newell.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  this  question  is  so 
large  that  it  is  difficult  for  me  to  take  up  any  one  item  without  enter¬ 
ing  into  the  whole  subject;  but  I  think  that  the  great  question  which 
has  been  brought  up  is  the  function  of  the  General  Government  in  the 
West. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


21 


The  General  Government,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  are  the 
owners  of  from  three-quarters  to  nine-tenths  of  all  the  land  in  the 
West.  In  Nevada  the  people  of  the  United  States  own  98  per  cent  of 
the  State.  They  have,  as  owners,  rights  in  those  States  which  the 
States  themselves  do  not  have.  The  States  have  sometimes  only  the 
taxing  power  over  from  1  per  cent  to  5  per  cent  or  10  or  even  15  per 
cent  of  their  area,  as  in  the  case  of  California. 

The  people  of  the  United  States  are  supreme  in  their  control. 
Whenever  any  of  the  public  land  is  disposed  of  they  have  reserved 
the  rights  for  ditches  and  canals  constructed  by  the  authority  of  the 
United  States.1 

Mr.  Reeder.  That  is  a  reservation  in  the  transfers  of  land,  is  it  not? 

Mr.  Newell.  I  think  it  is  in  all  patents  for  land  west  of  the  one 
.hundredth  meridian.  Even  if  the  Government  did  not  own  an  acre 
of  land  in  those  States,  it  has  set  the  precedent  of  going  in  and  stor¬ 
ing  waters  wherever,  in  its  judgment,  it  sees  fit.  In  the  case  of  Min¬ 
nesota  and  Wisconsin  the  Government  has  built  large  reservoirs  at 
the  head  waters  of  the  Mississippi  River,  and  is  operating  those  reser¬ 
voirs,  irrespective  of  any  riparian  rights  which  may  be  conserved. 

Mr.  Reeder.  For  what  are  they  operating  those  reservoirs? 

Mr.  Newell.  For  the  benefit  of  navigation;  incidentally  to  improve 
the  water  power  at  Minneapolis.  The  Government  owns  the  reservoirs 
and  has  appropriated  over  $1,000,000  in  this  way.  In  the  present 
river  and  harbor  bill,  I  think,  there  are  large  items  for  continuing  the 
erection  of  these  reservoirs. 

The  Chairman.  There  is  $300,000  appropriated  for  that  purpose  in 
the  present  bill  (H.  R.  13189 :  Reservoirs  at  the  head  waters  of  the  Mis¬ 
sissippi  River;  continuing  improvement,  $300,000).  The  committee 
regards  that  as  a  bad  inheritance;  but  still  that  does  not  affect  the 
question  with  reference  to  this  matter. 

Mr.  Newell.  A  similar  condition  exists  in  California,  where  the 
Government,  in  conjunction  with  the  State,  is  building  debris  reser¬ 
voirs  which  necessarily  regulate  the  flow  of  the  stream,  to  keep  the 
washings  from  the  hydraulic  works  from  getting  into  the  streams  and 
destroying  the  agricultural  lands  below,  and  injuring  the  navigability 
of  the  streams.  There  is  still  a  third  and  a  larger  project  which  the 
Government  has  entered  upon,  and  which  it  is  committed  to  extend 
still  further;  and  that  is  the  policy  of  forest  protection  for  the  benefit 
of  agriculture. 

The  forest  lands  throughout  the  West  are  being  placed  in  large 
reservations,  irrespective  of  State  lines,  for  the  purpose  of  regulating 
the  stream  flow.  Those  forest  reserves  include  the  mountain  areas  in 
which  the  land  is  not  good  for  anything  except  the  growth  of  trees. 
They  are  so  regulated  that  mining  can  be  carried  on  without  obstruc¬ 
tion;  and  it  is  proposed  to  so  control  them  that  timber  can  be  cut  and 
used,  and  yet  the  forests  not  be  destroyed,  but  the  cover  retained 
for  the  protection  of  the  streams.  One  step  further  must  be  taken, 
and  that  is,  that  the  reservoir  sites  within  those  great  forest  areas 
shall  be  reserved,  and  reservoirs  shall  be  constructed  to  still  further 
regulate  the  flow  of  the  streams,  which  is  partially  done  by  the  pres- 


1  Provided ,  That  in  all  patents  for  lands  hereafter  taken  up  under  any  of  the 
land  laws  of  the  United  States  or  on  entries  or  claims  validated  by  this  act  west  of 
the  one  hundredth  meridian,  it  shall  be  expressed  that  there  is  reserved  from  the 
lands  in  said  patent  described  a  right  of  way  thereon  for  ditches  or  canals  con¬ 
structed  by  the  authority  of  the  United  States.  (Approved  August  30,  1890. 
Stat.  L.,  vol.  26,  p.  391.) 


22 


ARID  LAUDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


ervation  of  the  forests.  In  that  way  the  precedent  is  already  estab¬ 
lished  for  Governmental  control  and  Governmental  action  in  these 
matters. 

The  Geological  Survey  has  been  concerned  with  this  matter  since 
1888,  when  it  was  authorized  by  Congress  to  investigate  the  extent  to 
which  the  arid  lands  conld  be  reclaimed  by  irrigation.  In  that  and 
all  subsequent  legislation  there  has  been  no  recognition  especially  of 
public  lands,  but  simply  of  arid  lands.  The  policy  seem^do  be  well 
established  that  Congress  shall  consider  the  questions  of  the  utiliza¬ 
tion  of  the  lands  which  are  now  arid,  which  are  now  practically  use¬ 
less,  but  which  under  a  better  form  of  law  and  administration  may  be 
made  to  contribute  to  the  welfare  and  the  wealth  of  the  nation  as  a 
whole.  That  view  of  it  this  committee  must  take— that  it  is  concerned 
not  with  public  lands  (which  of  course  come  within  the  function  of 
the  Public  Lands  Committee),  but  with  the  whole  subject  of  making 
available  the  lands,  no  matter  whether  of  private,  State,  or  Govern¬ 
ment  ownership,  which  are  not  now  contributing  to  public  welfare, 
but  which  can  be  made  to  do  so  by  the  exercise  of  reasonable  business 
methods. 

If  the  limit  of  reclamation  is  75,000,000  acres,  this  does  not  mean 
that  the  United  States  Government  must  reclaim  all  of  those  acres, 
any  more  than  in  dredging  out  a  harbor  or  removing  an  obstruction 
from  it,  the  Government  is  committed  to  build  the  wharves  along  that 
harbor.  The  moment  yon  remove  the  obstructions  from  a  harbor 
capital  flows  in  to  build  up  wharves  and  terminal  facilities  otherwise 
prevented  by  the  existence  of  natural  obstructions. 

The  development  of  the  West  has  been  prevented  in  part  by  the 
presence  of  Indians.  The  Government  has  removed  that  obstruction; 
it  has  pushed  the  Indians  back.  Now  the  people  of  the  United  States 
are  saying  that  the  Government  should  push  back  the  still  remaining 
obstruction,  and  that  is  the  drought  due  to  the  unregulated  flow  of 
the  waters.  It  should  simply  regulate  these  streams,  so  that  at  low 
water  they  shall  carry  a  moderate  supply,  and  the  people  will  do  the 
rest. 

It  is  obvious  that  private  capital  or  State  capital  can  not  do  this 
work  of  regulating  the  flow  of  the  streams.  It  can  not  be  made  a 
matter  of  private  profit,  unless  the  corporation  or  the  individual  has 
such  an  exclusive  control  of  the  land  that  he  can  realize  all  the 
unearned  increments  of  value;  that  is  to  say,  you  build  a  reservoir 
on  the  Humboldt  River,  for  example;  you  can  not  control  the  lands 
along  that  river  to  an  extent  that  you  can  bring  back,  in  the  shape  of 
profits,  the  increased  value  that  goes  to  e  veryone.  It  goes  to  the  land 
owners;  it  goes  to  the  general  public,  and  you,  as  a  citizen,  can  not 
put  it  back  into  your  pocket  as  a  proper  earning. 

That  has  been  tried  again  and  again,  and  foreign  and  eastern  capi¬ 
tal  has  been  invested  in  storage  enterprises  under  a  misapprehension 
of  the  circumstances.  Practically  every  one  of  those  large  storage 
enterprises  is  to-day  bankrupt,  except  one  or  two,  where  there  was 
such  a  monopoly  that  the  investors  controlled  every  acre  of  land 
which  was  benefited,  directly  or  indirectly,  by  the  presence  of  the 
reservoir. 

Now,  the  moment  you  do  construct  a  reservoir  all  land  values  rise, 
and  the  result  is  that  while  the  man  who  puts  his  capital  into  the 
structure  may  have  lost  it,  somebody  has  made  far  more  than  that 
reservoir  cost. 

We  can  not  expect  that  individual  enterprise  will  go  on  and  build 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.  23 

more  of  those  reservoirs.  It  can  not  make  the  profits  and  interest 
necessary  t6  repay  the  investments.  Consequently  development  along 
the  line  of  water  conservation  has  stopped,  because  the  conservation 
as  such  can  not  be  made  profitable  to  the  individual  or  the  investor. 

That  brings  up  two  divergent  lines  of  action  which  this  committee 
must  necessarily  consider.  The  one  is  the  regulation  of  rivers  whose 
waters  arajused  through  so  many  localities  along  such  a  great  course 
that  you  ,^n  not  place  the  specific  benefits  anywhere.  For  example,  I 
will  call  yuur  attention  later  to  the  proposed  diversion  of  the  St.  Mary 
River  into  the  head  waters  of  the  Milk  River,  in  Montana.  That  will 
put  into  a  stream  which  is  now  practically  dry  a  volume  of  water  of  a 
thousand  or  more  cubic  feet  a  second,  and  it  will  benefit  settlers  along 
a  course  of  500  miles.  Now,  we  can  not  assess  the  benefits  along  those 
500  miles,  because  they  are  direct  and  indirect.  There  are  already 
irrigating  ditches  there  which  have  been  insufficiently  supplied,  and 
which  would,  under  the  proposed  plan,  receive  an  ample  supply. 
Other  ditches  too  would  be  constructed.  In  such  a  case  the  Govern¬ 
ment  must  necessarily  build  the  work  as  a  matter  of  general  benefit, 
but  without  any  hope  of  specific  returns  from  the  lands  to  be  benefited. 

On  the  other  extreme,  we  have  such  projects  as  that  of  Mr.  New- 
lands,  for  improving  the  Humboldt  River  or  the  Truckee  River,  where 
we  can  ascertain  with  a  reasonable  degree  of  accuracy  the  benefit  to 
every  acre.  There,  if  in  the  wisdom  of  Congress  it  is  decided  to  obtain 
reimbursement,  it  is  possible  to  allot  to  each  particular  tract,  pro  rata, 
what  it  ought  to  pay  for  the  improvement. 

Ultimately  both  of  these  methods  will  be  adopted  in  legislation.  In 
the  river  and  harbor  bill  we  must  have  regulation  of  many  of  the 
streams  which  flow  into  navigable  waters,  which  regulation  will  inure 
more  to  the  benefit  of  the  settlers  than  to  navigation.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  will  undoubtedly  have,  in  the  sundry  civil  bill  or  some  similar 
bill,  provisions  for  constructing  reservoirs  or  regulating  works  in  which 
the  benefits  can  be  levied  directly  upon  the  lands ;  and  I  have  no  doubt 
that  the  people  in  those  countries  would  be  more  than  glad  to  have 
the  Government  regulate  their  rivers  and  assess,  in  any  way  it  might, 
the  benefits  to  be  derived. 

The  proposition  of  Mr.  Newlands,  while  it  is  open  to  a  great  many 
objections,  is  apparently  more  feasible  at  the  present  time  than  any 
other.  It  proposes  to  devote  to  the  construction  of  certain  regulating 
works  the  proceeds  which  are  now  covered  into  the  Treasury;  and  it 
is  in  its  larger  conception  an  appropriation  of  monej^.  From  a  study 
of  the  newspaper  clippings  that  have  reached  me  from  year  to  year,  I 
see  that  the  objections  that  are  raised  are  not  those  of  intelligence, 
but  those  of  ignorance.  We  have  thousands  of  little  squibs  in  the* 
papers  to  the  effect  that  “  The  farmers  of  the  East  will  not  submit  to 
be  taxed  to  benefit  the  West,”  and  so  on.  Now,  you  can  not  reason 
with  that  class  of  people.  But  you  can  stop  them  by  simply  saying, 
“We  do  not  appropriate  directly  any  money  from  the  Treasury; 
we  simply  divert  the  money  which  comes  from  the  arid  lands  and  put 
it  back  into  the  arid  lands,  where  it  properly  belongs;  and  ulti¬ 
mately  all  of  this  money  is  refunded  to  the  Government.”  ^ 

If  we  had  only  the  intelligent,  thinking,  reading  class  of  people  to 
deal  with,  we. could  possibly  in  time  educate  all  to  a  better  concep¬ 
tion  of  these  facts.  But  we  are  compelled  to  meet  the  dead  opposi¬ 
tion  of  people  who  will  simply  take  a  catchword,  a  phrase,  and  fight 
a  good  measure  merely  in  order  to  be  in  opposition.  Mr.  Newlands’s 
general  bill  has  been  so  worded  as  to  avoid  striking  on  all  the  snags 


24 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


which  are  impeding  the  progress  of  the  development  and  reclamation 
of  the  arid  lands. 

If  it  is  possible  to  create  a  fund  from  the  balance  left  over  in  the 
Treasury  from  different  funds  which  may  be  charged  up  to  the  sales 
of  public  lands;  if  that  amount  should  be  only  half  a  million  dollars, 
which  could  be  well  invested  in  a  few  regulation  works,  and  the 
money  turned  over,  it  would  not  be  many  years  before  we  would  see 
a  substantial  improvement  all  along  the  line.  In  this  work  it  is  not 
proposed  or  desired  to  reclaim  all  of  the  arid  lands  at  once,  but  to 
commit  the  Government  to  some  policy  which  will  enable  the  ultimate 
reclamation  of  all  these  arid  lands. 

At  present,  with  the  matter  not  embodied  in  legislation,  the  devel¬ 
opments  are  proceeding  along  lines  which  are  obstructionary.  We  are 
allowing  men  to  go  in  and  take  up  commanding  positions,  to  file  upon 
lands  which  are  of  relatively  small  benefit  to  them  as  individuals,  but 
which  will  block  the  development  of  homes  and  farms  for  hundreds 
of  additional  individuals.  For  example,  I  have  a  clipping  from  a  Den¬ 
ver  paper  regarding  a  sale  of  160  acres,  including  water  supply  con¬ 
trolling  10,000  acres  of  Government  land.  Now,  under  a  wise  admin¬ 
istration  of  the  land  laws,  it  might  be  possible  for  500  families  to  live 
where  one  man  has  ingeniously  taken  up  his  holdings  so  as  to  control 
all  the  water.  His  160  acres  are  scattered  along  in  forties  in  such  a 
way  as  to  block  access  to  all  the  10,000  acres  of  public  lands  around. 
And  if  you  study  the  map  of  the  public  lands  you  will  see  how  indi¬ 
viduals  everywhere  are  grasping  sources  of  water  supply  which  they 
will  not  be  able  to  use  themselves;  they  have  not  the  funds,  they  have 
not  the  ability  to  develop  this  water  and  conserve  it;  and  yet  they  are 
in  a  position  to  prevent  many  settlers  from  making  homes. 

Now,  that  feature  of  the  problem  should  be  recognized  at  an  early 
date ;  and  whether  we  spend  a  few  hundred  thousand  or  a  few  million 
dollars  in  the  next  generation,  the  action  should  be  in  such  a  line  that 
it  will  not  prevent  the  future  utilization  of  all  the  seventy-odd  mil¬ 
lion  acres  which  can  be  reclaimed. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  Will  you  permit  a  question,  Mr.  Newell?  I  think 
you  said  the  Survdy  had  been  conducting  a  series  of  surveys  for  the 
last  twelve  years?  You  have,  I  presume,  practically  surveyed  a  large 
proportion  of  this  arid  land.  Are  you  able  to  give  us  an  estimate  of 
the  cost  of  the  improvements,  building  of  reservoirs,  etc. ,  sufficient  to 
save  the  waters  for  the  land  that  can  be  reached? 

Mr.  Newell.  The  estimates  which  we  have  been  conducting  are 
more  along  the  line  of  available  water  supply  than  of  the  construction 
of  works.  But  as  far  as  our  information  now  goes,  it  is  probable  that 
water  can  be  stored  for  less  than  $5  an  acre-foot.  In  some  of  the  esti¬ 
mates  which  we  have  here,  but  1  acre-foot — that  is,  1  foot  of  water  in 
depth — is  devoted  to  an  acre  of  land.  Of  course,  the  cost  of  reclama¬ 
tion,  as  far  as  the  storage  of  water  is  concerned,  would  be  less  than 
$5  an  acre  there.  If,  however,  as  in  the  case  of  alfalfa,  where  water 
is  cheap  and  plenty  of  it  is  put  on,  sometimes  as  much  as  3  or  4  feet, 
the  cost  would  be  proportionately  greater.  Then  there  are  a  great 
many  alternatives  as  to  character  of  soil,  skill  of  the  irrigator,  and 
kind  of  crop. 

Mr.  Reeder.  You  say  more  than  3  or  4  feet  of  water  to  an  acre  are 
used? 

Mr.  Newell.  In  alfalfa,  j^es.  In  southern  California  and  Arizona, 
where  they  have  upward  of  five  or  seven  cuttings  of  alfalfa  a  year, 
every  cutting  may  represent  a  foot  or  more  of  water  put  on  the  ground. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


25 


In  other  regions,  where  orchards  are  irrigated  and  the  water  supply  is 
scarce  through  the  whole  season,  the  farmers  put  on  only  a  depth  of 
two  or  three  inches.  They  are  forced  to  practice  economy. 

Mr.  Wilson.  We  do  not  put  a  foot  upon  our  orchards,  where  we 
have  an  abundance  of  water.  I  had  a  measuring  machine  on  my 
orchard  and  found  that  to  be  the  fact. 

Mr.  Newlands.  The  quantity  used  for  alfalfa  diminishes  with  the 
length  of  time  for  which  the  land  is  irrigated,  does  it  not? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes.  Of  course  all  of  these  matters  depend  upon 
the  skill  of  the  man  and  the  length  of  time  the  ground  has  been 
watered.  Take  even  the  coarse  open  soils  of  Utah  and  Idaho.  The 
first  year  the  settlers  put  on  a  depth  of  water  of  perhaps  10  feet,  or 
even  20  feet.  It  all  goes  down  through  the  soil,  which  gradually 
becomes  more  compact,  so  that  less  and  less  water  is  required;  until 
now,  in  some  parts  of  California  at  least,  no  water  whatever  is  sup¬ 
plied  to  the  surface  of  the  soil. 

Mr.  Wilson.  Then  the  cultivation  of  the  orchards  has  a  good  deal 
to  do  with  it — making  them  conserve  the  water  that  is  there? 

Mr.  Reeder.  Yes;  I  run  an  orchard  on  that  principle,  entirely  with¬ 
out  water,  where  formerly  the  trees  would  not  have  grown  at  all 
without  it. 

Mr.  Newell.  This  survey  has  been  conducted  mainly  up  to  the 
present  time  along  the  lines  of  finding  out  where  the  water  was,  how 
much  there  was,  and  how  much  could  be  stored,  and  we  are  now  try¬ 
ing  to  get  at  the  cost  of  storing  it  and  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from 
the  reclamation  of  the  land.  If  you  desire,  I  can  now  take  up  a  few 
specific  localities. 

Mr.  Barham.  Just  a  moment,  before  you  go  to  that  branch  of  the 
matter.  In  your  opinion,  what  will  be  the  cost  to  the  Government  of 
a  complete  survey,  having  in  view  the  irrigation  of  the  arid  lands  of 
the  United  States? 

Mr.  Newell.  The  estimates  I  have  prepared  have  been  on  the  basis 
of  an  expenditure  of  $250,000  a  year  for  about  five  years.  The  area 
to  be  covered,  you  must  recollect,  is  larger  than  nearly  all  of  that  of 
the  civilized  world.  Take  the  area  of  Europe  and  it  is  smaller  than 
the  region  which  we  are  proposing  to  investigate. 

Mr.  Barham.  In  round  numbers,  the  cost  of  surveys  alone  would 
be  about  how  much? 

Mr.  Newell.  It  is  as  indefinite  as  an  estimate  as  to  what  would  be 
the  cost  of  this  city  when  finished.  One  thing  leads  to  another.  But 
the  essential  facts  can  be  ascertained  within  a  few  years  with  an 
expenditure  of  about  that  amount.  Of  course  the  expenditure  of  that 
amount  in  learning  how  the  rivers  behave  when  the  floods  occur,  how 
much  they  are,  what  the  cost  of  holding  them  is,  and  what  would  be 
the  benefit  to  the  lands,  will  be  distributed  over  this  vast  area,  capable 
of  supporting,  when  developed,  a  population  of,  say,  50,000,000.  I  do 
not  think  it  is  any  exaggeration  to  say  that  as  many  or  more  people 
can  find  homes  west  of  the  Missouri  River  than  east  of  it. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  From  the  preliminary  survey  which  you  have 
made,  how  many  great  reservoir  sites  would  you  say  there  are  that 
could  be  constructed? 

Mr.  Newell.  We  have  found  something  less  than  100  which  would 
be  called  worthy  of  consideration.  As  a  rule  a  man  will  report  that 
in  his  county  there  are  a  great  many  good  reservoir  sites.  We  go 
there  and  examine  them.  We  find,  usually,  that  the  open  valleys  are 
so  greatly  inclined  that  a  dam  or  reservoir  100  feet  or  so  in  height  will 


26 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


not  back  up  water  to  any  considerable  extent.  It  is  an  optical  delu¬ 
sion  by  which  a  broad  valley  is  apparently  level,  but  it  is  really  highly 
inclined;  so  that  probably  not  one  out  of  twenty  reservoir  sites  that 
are  popularly  supposed  to  be  good  would  actually  be  feasible  under 
the  present  cost  of  construction  and  land  values. 

When  we  have  a  population  of  50,000,000  people,  and  when  land 
values  run  away  up  into  hundreds  of  dollars  per  acre,  it  will  be  pos¬ 
sible  then  to  construct  reservoirs  which  are  now  utterly  absurd. 

Mr.  Newlands.  In  speaking  of  the  number  of  reservoirs,  do  not 
the  canals  which  are  constructed  really  form  reservoirs  in  themselves 
by  saturating  the  soil  and  by  making  underground  reservoirs  which 
feed  other  lands  by  seepage? 

Mr.  Newell.  That  is  true,  of  course.  But  the  great  primary  step 
is  to  hold  the  waters  up  in  the  mountains ;  and  then,  as  the  lands  are  sat¬ 
urated  in  the  valleys,  the  extension  of  irrigation  takes  place  naturally. 

Mr.  Newlands.  You  will  find,  in  a  given  stream,  that  the  water 
will  be  entirely  taken  out,  and  then  10  or  15  miles  below  you  will  find 
the  water  restored  to  the  stream,  by  seepage,  will  you  not? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes.  So  that  along  the  Arkasas  River,  probably  one 
of  the  best  examples,  the  water  coming  down  from  the  mountains  is 
taken  out  on  the  plains;  then  a  few  miles  below  the  river  is  seen  to 
increase  in  volume  and  another  canal  comes  out.  Below  that  there 
will  be,  perhaps,  a  tight  dam,  taking  out  all  visible  water.  Ten  miles 
below  there  will  be  quite  a  stream,  and  another  tight  dam  taking  out 
all  the  visible  water,  and  so  on — the  water  tending  to  creep  gradually 
down  toward  Kansas.  The  same  is  true  on  the  South  Platte  River, 
which  now  is  dry  for,  jierliaps,  a  hundred  miles  or  so  above  the 
Nebraska  line;  but  the  tendency  is  for  the  water  to  gradually  creep 
down  toward  Nebraska.  With  the  ultimate  development  of  all  the 
storage  reservoirs  in  Colorada,  and  with  the  use  of  that  water  to  its 
full  extent  on  the  plains,  there  may  be  a  larger  flow  at  the  Kansas  and 
Nebraska  lines  than  there  is  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  Barham.  Have  you  made  any  estimate  as  to  the  probable  cost 
of  the  whole  scheme? 

Mr.  Newell.  I  have  not,  for  the  reason  that  while  the  Government 
might,  we  will  say,  put  $5  an  acre  into  regulating  the  water,  private 
capital  would  then  enter  in  to  the  extent  of  three  or  four  times  as 
much  in  the  minor  works  which  would  be  rendered  possible  by  it — in 
the  same  way  that  $100,000  in  dredging  a  bar  at  the  mouth  of  a  river 
would  result  in  the  expenditure  of  millions  of  dollars  in  wharves  and 
shipping  facilities. 

If  you  care  to  take  the  specific  localities,  I  would  refer  you  to  east¬ 
ern  Oregon,  where  we  have  the  Malheur  and  Owyhee  rivers,  torren¬ 
tial  streams  flowing  from  the  mountains  through  a  desert  country,  and 
entering  the  Snake  River  near  the  mouth  of  the  Boise  and  the  Pajmtte. 
Now,  on  the  other  side,  in  Idaho,  is  some  of  the  best  fruit  country 
in  the  world,  and  developments  are  very  rapid  there.  But  on  the 
other  side,  along  the  Malheur  and  Owyhee,  owing  to  the  torrential 
character  of  the  streams,  agriculture  has  developed  very  little.  Now, 
it  will  be  possible,  by  storage  reservoirs  in  the  head  waters,  to  con¬ 
serve  the  flow  of  those  streams  and  make  possible  a  development  of 
the  fruit  lands  in  these  lower  valleys  comparable  to  that  of  those  in 
the  vicinity  of  Boise  and  other  regions  around  there.  So  that  a  few 
hundred  thousand  dollars  put  into  reservoirs  on  the  head  waters  of 
these  streams  would  undoubtedly  result  ultimately  in  the  addition  of 
millions  of  dollars  of  taxable  property  to  that  end  of  Oregon.  The 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


27 


same  is  true,  to  a  less  degree,  of  the  Umatilla  and  other  rivers  in  the 
eastern  portion  of  the  State. 

The  same  thing  is  true  of  a  portion  of  the  State  of  Idaho.  The 
Snake  River,  coming  out  from  the  vicinity  of  the  Yellowstone  National 
Park,  flows  out  on  a  great  lava  plain,  where  it  could  easily  he  diverted, 
and  then  begins  to  sink  into  a  deep  canyon  from  which  the  water  can 
not  be  brought  because  it  is  too  far  beneath  the  irrigable  lands.  It 
is  possible  to  take  out  several  large  canals  and  cover  a  considerable 
portion  of  this  desert.  The  streams  which  come  in  from  the  south 
can  be  stored  and  the  water  can  be  taken  out  on  the  lands  along  the 
stream;  and  it  is  possible  to  develop  a  considerable  area  of  good  land 
by  the  regulation  of  the  waters  which  now  run  to  waste. 

For  another  example  let  us  consider  the  Truckee  Basin  in  Nevada 
and  in  California.  Lake  Tahoe  receives  the  drainage  from  a  forested 
area  in  the  Sierra  Nevadas.  It  is  formed  by  the  blocking-up  of  an 
ancient  valley  by  a  great  lava  flow,  and  is  a  natural  reservoir.  But 
its  waters  are  not  controlled.  It  lies  in  such  a  position  that  about 
one-half  of  the  lake  is  in  Nevada,  but  the  outlet  is  in  California.  The 
Nevada  people  are  helpless  in  attempting  to  control  that  lake.  Cali¬ 
fornians  have  the  idea  that  they  can  use  that  lake  to  supply  San 
Francisco  at  some  time  in  the  future,  and  they  resent  any  attempt 
made  by  the  Nevada  people  to  get  the  waters  and  carry  them  over  to 
the  east. 

Mr.  Newlands.  In  order  to  utilize  that  lake  for  California,  it  would 
be  necessary  to  tunnel  through  an  immense  intervening  ridge,  would 
it  not? 

Mr.  Wilson.  It  illustrates  the  wild  ideas  Californians  have  gener¬ 
ally.  [Laughter.  ] 

Mr.  Mondell.  How  long  a  tunnel  would  be  required? 

Mr.  Barham.  Oh,  a  tunnel  6  or  7  miles  long — a  mere  bagatelle  in 
California,  where  we  have  big  trees  and  big  men. 

Mr.  Newell.  That  stream  flows  out  through  a  portion  of  California 
and  is  discharged  easterly,  flowing  down  into  Pyramid  Lake  and  into 
Winnemucca  Lake. 

Mr.  Newlands.  And  those  two  lakes  are  in  the  sink  or  lower  part 
of  the  desert,  are  they  not? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes.  As  Mr.  Newlands  has  said  before,  the  existence 
of  those  lakes  in  there  shows  the  amount  of  water  which  is  useless, 
which  might  have  been  employed  in  agriculture  in  these  valleys  above. 
There  are  also  a  number  of  relatively  small  lakes  and  reservoir  sites 
in  California  on  Truckee  River  which  can  be  utilized  to  supply  water 
for  the  irrigation  of  those  lands. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Now,  Mr.  Newell,  will  you  bring  out  the  fact  that 
this  area  of  which  you  are  speaking  in  California  is  on  the  Nevada 
slope  of  the  mountains,  and  is  not  toward  California,  and  that  it  feeds 
the  Nevada  streams  and  not  the  California  streams? 

Mr.  Newell.  The  summit  divide  between  the  watershed  flowing  to 
the  east  and  the  west  would  properly  form  the  dividing  line  between 
those  two  States.  But  in  laying  out  the  boundary  it  was  placed  over 
on  the  east  side  of  the  summit  or  divide,  so  that  it  results  that  every 
reservoir  site  which  can  be  used  to  benefit  Nevada  is  over  the  line  in 
California. 

Mr.  Newlands.  That  is  true  of  three  rivers. 

Mr.  Newell.  Although  that  line  is  an  imaginary  one,  it  divides  a 
very  active  State  sentiment  in  regard  to  the  control  of  water  of  those 
streams. 


28 


AKID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Newlands.  The  peculiarity  of  the  California  area  is  that  there 
is  no  land  capable  of  irrigation  on  this  slope  within  the  California 
line.  It  is  all  mountain  land. 

Mr.  Newell.  The  reservoir  sites  are  on  one  side  and  the  irrigable 
lands  on  the  other,  with  the  State  line  between.  By  a  conservation 
of  these  waters  by  reservoirs,  the  cost  of,  which  has  been  estimated, 
it  will  be  possible  to  reclaim  thousands  of  acres  of  desert  land  lying 
out  on  these  valleys — some  of-^the  best  lands  in  the  United  States, 
lands  which  have  never  been  washed  bjr  the  rains.  They  are  full  of 
fertility;  and  yet,  owing  to  the  difficulties  of  getting  water  to  them, 
the  poor,  rocky  land  in  the  vicinity  of  Reno  has  been  used  as  against 
the  rich,  fertile,  fine  lands  of  the  farther  valleys.  I  do  not  think  in 
any  part  of  the  United  States  have  I  seen  farms  on  rockier  soil,  even 
up  in  Maine  and  Vermont,  than  some  of  those  around  Reno,  simply 
because  they  could  not  afford  to  take  the  water  back  to  the  better 
soils  of  the  lands  in  the  neighboring  deserts. 

Mr.  Newlands.  And  yet  those  30,000  acres  of  alfalfa  sustain  a  town 
of  4,500  people.  It  is  almost  the  main  source  of  the  prosperity  of  the 
town. 

Mr.  Newell.  There  is  no  telling  what  the  population  might  do  if 
they  used  all  the  good  soil.  Now,  regulation  of  this  stream,  con¬ 
servation  of  its  flow,  would  result  in  the  bringing  under  irrigation  of 
these  many  thousand  acres  of  land,  and  bringing  in  an  enormous 
amount  of  private  capital  in  the  shape  of  settlers  and  their  effects  and 
their  labor  in  building  up  a  State. 

To  sum  up  the  whole  matter,  the  following  statement  may  be  made : 

In  the  State  of  Nevada  there  is  the  Humboldt,  of  which  Mr.  New¬ 
lands  has  spoken,  and  the  estimates  are  in  a  fair  degree  of  completion 
concerning  the  whole  Truckee  Basin.  They  are  as  follows,  as  stated 
in  a  report  by  Mr.  L.  H.  Taylor: 


Name  of  reservoir. 

Gross  ca¬ 
pacity. 

Net 

amount 
which  may 
be  annu¬ 
ally  drawn 
off. 

Cost  of 
dam, 
rights  of 
way,  etc. 

Cost 
per  acre- 
foot. 

Lake  Tahoe  . 

Acre-feet. 
745,400 
26, 900 
11,750 
10,450 
1, 600 
3,480 
20,540 
17,000 
6,500 
5,785 
6, 500 

Acre-feet. 
250,000 
26,900 
11, 700 
10,400 
1,600 
3, 400 

$21,402 
82,672 
31,802 
50,463 
7,920 
20,125 
62,215 
40, 365 
28, 750 
17,037 
26,708 

$0.09 

3.07 

2.72 

Donner  Lake . . . . . . 

Independence  Lake . . . . 

WebFer  Lake  . . . . . . 

4.85 

Squaw  Creek . 

4.95 

Twin  Valley . 

5.92 

Little  Truckee  No.l_ . . . . 

20,500 

16,000 

6.500 

5.500 

6.500 

3.04 

Henness  Pass  Valley . 

2.52 

Little  Truckee  No.  2 . . . 

4.42 

Dost  Valley  . . 

3. 10 

4.11 

Little  Valley.. . 

Total . 

855,905 

359,000 

389,459 

1.09 

It  is  feasible  to  construct  storage  reservoirs  in  Sardine  Valley,  Cali¬ 
fornia,  and  at  two  points  on  the  main  Truckee  River  between  Reno 
and  Wadsworth,  but  owing  to  the  sites  of  such  reservoirs  being  trav¬ 
ersed  by  railroads  the  cost  for  rights  of  way,  including  removal  of 
railroad  tracks,  would  be  excessive. 

If  Lake  Tahoe  be  created  into  a  storage  reservoir  with  the  gross 
capacity  of  745,400  acre-feet  above  ultimate  low- water  plane,  so  as  to 
store  the  waters  of  wet  years  for  use  during  the  dry  years,  it  will  be 
feasible  to  draw  therefrom  250,000  acre-feet  annually. 


ABID*  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


29 


The  watersheds  tributary  to  the  other  reservoirs  named  yield  suffi¬ 
cient  water,  even  in  seasons  of  minimum  precipitation,  to  fill  each 
of  them,  with  the  possible  exception  of  the  Henness  Pass  Valley 
reservoir. 

The  waters  stored  in  the  reservoirs  named,  if  employed  to  supple¬ 
ment  the  ordinary  flow  of  the  Truckee  River,  and  used  with  moderate 
economy,  are  sufficient,  even  in  the  driest  years,  to  irrigate  187,616 
acres  of  land  in  excess  of  what  is  now  watered,  or  a  total  of  230,000 
acres,  leaving  a  surplus  of  79,000  acre-feet  for  safety,  besides  main¬ 
taining  the  flow  of  the /Truckee  River  at  the  minimum  of  300  cubic 
feet  per  second  above  the  town  of  Reno,  to  afford  a  supply  for  power 
and  other  purposes. 

It  is  feasible  to  construct  an  irrigating  canal  with  a  capacity  of  550 
cubic  feet  per  second  from  the  Truckee  River  at  a  point  near  Floris- 
ton$  in  California,  to  supply  75,000  acres  of  good  arable  lands  above 
and  to  the  north  and  northeastward  from  Reno,  at  a  cost,  for  diver¬ 
sion  canal  and  headworks  and  the  main  branches  and  distributaries, 
of  $750,000. 

It  is  feasible  to  construct  a  canal  on  the  south  side  of  the  Truckee 
River,  from  a  point  above  Clarks  Station,  having  a  capacity  of  750 
cubic  feet  per  second,  to  a  point  a  short  distance  above  Wadsworth, 
where  a  branch  with  225  second-feet  capacity  can  be  taken  across  the 
river  by  pressure  pipes  and  led  northward  toward  Pyramid  Lake, 
while  the  main  branch,  with  a  capacity  of  525  second-feet,  can  be  con¬ 
tinued  on  to  the  southeast  and  eastward  from  Wadsworth,  the  two 
branches  supplying  water  to  99,000  acres  of  land,  of  which  about 
30,000  acres  are  in  the  Truckee  River  Basin  (over  20,000  being  in  the 
Pyramid  Lake  Indian  Reservation  and  69,000  acres  in  the  basin  of  the 
Carson  River,  approximately  50,000  of  which  are  in  Carson  Sink  Val¬ 
ley),  and  that  the  cost  of  this  canal  system,  including  the  principal 
distributing  branches,  will  be  about  $4  for  each  acre  commanded,  or 
$396,000. 

The  entire  upper  portion  of  the  Truckee  River  Basin,  embracing  all 
of  the  drainage  area  above  the  town  of  Verdi  and  the  north  and  east 
timbered  slopes  of  the  Tahoe  range  of  mountains,  should  be  set  aside 
as  a  forest  and  water  reserve  or  a  national  park,  and  the  waters  be 
forever  dedicated  for  use  for  industrial  and  irrigation  purposes  within 
the  basin  and  upon  such  lands  immediately  adjacent  as  they  may 
supply. 

The  Lake  Tahoe  dam  should  be  built  as  the  first  step  in  the  storage 
of  water  upon  the  Truckee,  and  all  private  rights  in  the  other  reser¬ 
voir  sites  mentioned  should  be  acquired  by  the  Federal  Government, 
so  that  when  the  time  for  their  utilization  arrives  there  will  be  no 
obstacle  to  their  construction. 

The  portion  of  the  public  domain  which  can  be  irrigated  from  the 
stored  waters  of  the  Truckee  River  should  be  withdrawn  from  entry, 
and  after  being  provided  with  a  system  of  canals  for  the  delivery  of 
water  should  be  offered  for  sale  at  a  price  commensurate  with  their 
value  as  irrigable  lands  with  water  rights.  The  irrigated  and  irri¬ 
gable  lands  should  be  embraced  in  a  Federal  irrigation  district,  and 
the  water  rights  for  lands  held  in  private  ownership,  outside  of  such 
as  are  now  irrigated,  should  be  sold  at  the  same  price  as  is  charged 
for  the  public  lands  with  water.  All  moneys  derived  from  the  sale  of 
lands  and  water  rights,  and  from  their  sources  to  be  devoted,  first,  to 
the  reimbursement  of  the  cost  of  reservoirs  and  canals,  and,  second, 
to  the  maintenance  and  improvement  of  the  irrigation  system  and  to 


30 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


defraying  the  expense  of  administration.  All  power  privileges  not 
already  appropriated  should  be  appraised  and  disposed  of  at  a  reason¬ 
able  valuation,  and  the  benefits  to  present  users  of  the  waters  of  the 
Truckee  River  for  power  purposes  arising  from  the  increased  and 
more  steady  discharge  due  to  storage  should  be  assessed  and  paid  for 
by  such  users. 

Surveys  have  also  been  made  on  the  Humboldt  and  Truckee  rivers. 
On  Rock  Creek,  a  tributary  of  Humboldt  River,  a  dam  can  be  built 
storing  80,000  acre-feet,  and  costing  $62,300,  as  described  in  the  Twen¬ 
tieth  Annual  Report  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey,  Part  IV, 
page  445.  On  the  Lower  Humboldt  River  a  series  of  reservoirs  can 
be  built  at  an  estimated  cost  of  $148,300,  storing  55,000  acrefeet,  and, 
with  the  flow  of  the  river,  irrigating  60,000  acres. 

In  Arizona  detailed  surveys  have  been  made  on  Gila  River,  the 
results  having  been  published  in  Paper  No.  33  of  the  series  of  Water- 
Supply  and  Irrigation  Papers  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey. 
The  most  feasible  reservoir  is  that  on  the  San  Carlos  Apache  Indian 
Reservation.  The  capacity  of  this  reservoir  will  be  241,396  acre-feet 
and  the  cost  $1,038,926.' 

In  California  detailed  surveys  have  been  recently  made  of  a  number 
of  reservoirs,  principally  in  the  high  sierras.  One  of  these  is  in  the 
Hetch  Hetchy  Valley;  it  is  described  in  the  Twenty- first  Annual 
Report  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey,  pages  450  to  465.  The 
total  cost  of  the  dam  and  accessories  will  be  $607,057,  storing  107,000 
acre-feet,  at  a  cost  of  $5.67  per  acre-foot. 

In  addition,  a  number  of  surveys  have  been  made  in  cooperation 
with  the  California  Water  and  Forest  Association,  the  results  of  which 
are  shown  in  Senate  Document  No.  59  of  the  Fifty-sixth  Congress, 
second  session.  The  most  important  is  the  Clarks  Valley  reservoir, 
storing  223,224  acre-feet,  at  a  cost,  for  the  dams,  of  $1,311,842.  In 
order  to  fill  the  reservoir,  it  will  be  necessary  to  construct  a  diversion 
conduit  from  King  River  with  a  tunnel,  the  total  cost  of  works  and 
the  dams  being  $2,013,949,  or  at  a  rate  of  $9.02  per  acre-foot  stored. 

In  Montana  surveys  have  been  made  to  ascertain  the  feasibility  of 
diverting  St.  Mary  River  into  the  head  waters  of  Milk  River.  This 
project  has  been  found  not  to  offer  unusual  engineering  difficulties. 
The  cost  of  the  first  9  miles,  the  most  difficult  part  of  the  route,  has 
been  estimated  to  be  $325,000. 

In  Wyoming  the  reservoir  site  on  Grey  Bull  River,  storing  14,204 
acre-feet,  will  cost,  for  construction  of  dam,  $49,962. 

These  facts  are  given  in  concise  form  in  the  following  summary: 


Cost  of  projects  for  which  surveys  have  been  made. 


State. 

Reservoir. 

Capacity. 

Total  cost. 

Cost  per 
acre-foot. 

Arizona _ _ _ _ 

San  Carlos . . . 

Acre-feet. 

241,396 

107,000 

223,224 

216,000 

39,650 

80,000 

$1,038,926 
607,057 
2,013,949 
1,277,500 
387,400 
452, 484 
(325, 000) 
62,300 
148,300 
389,495 
49,962 

$4.30 
5. 67 
9.02 
5. 91 
7.25 
5.66 

California . . . 

Hetcli  He  tch v _ _ 

Montana . - . 

Clarks  Valley . . 

Enlargement . . 

Stony  Creek, . . 

Clear  Lake . _ 

St.  Mary . . _ . 

Nevada . . . 

Rock  Creek . . 

80, 000 
55, 000 
359,000 
14,204 

.78 

2.70 

1.08 

3.52 

Wyoming . . . 

Lower  Humboldt . 

Truckee . __ . . 

Grey  Bull . . . 

Total . . 

1,415,474 

6, 327, 337 

4.47 

ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


31 


STATEMENT  OF  GEORGE  H.  MAXWELL,  OF  SAN  FRANCISCO,  CAL., 

CHAIRMAN  OF  THE  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  OF  THE  NATIONAL 

IRRIGATION  ASSOCIATION. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen  of  the  committee:  I 
hardly  know  to  what  particular  point  to  address  myself. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Our  inquiry,  Mr.  Maxwell,  has  been  directed  so  far 
to  two  bills — the  Humboldt  River  bill,  in  Nevada,  which  you  have  seen, 
and  a  general  bill.  The  latter  provides  for  the  setting  apart  of  all 
moneys  received  from  the  sales  of  public  lands  in  the  arid  and  semi- 
arid  States  to  a  special  fund  in  the  Treasury,  to  be  called  the  “arid- 
lands  reclamation  fund.”  It  is  then  provided  that  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  with  the  aid  of  the  Geological  Survey,  shall  go  on  and  sur¬ 
vey  and  complete  projects  to  withdraw  the  lands  subject  to  a  given 
scheme  from  general  entry,  and  provision  is  made  for  the  entry  under 
this  law  in  areas  not  exceeding  80  acres  for  each  ent^man,  and  for 
the  imposition  of  the  cost  of  the  water  right  proportionately  upon 
every  acre  of  the  land  benefited.  It  is  provided  that  the  moneys  shall 
be  paid  in  ten  annual  installments,  which  are  to  go  back  into  this 
reclamation  fund,  thus  creating  a  revolving  reclamation  fund.  Those 
are  the  two  bills  which  have  been  under  consideration.  The  general 
subject  has  also  been  under  discussion. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Taking  up  the  last  bill  first,  Mr.  Chairman,  it  seems 
to  me  that  the  bill  for  the  creation  of  this  arid-land  reclamation  fund 
has  a  great  merit,  from  this  point  of  view: 

I  have  followed  for  a  number  of  years  past  the  objections  which 
have  been  raised  from  time  to  time  in  the  editorial  columns  of  some 
of  the  papers  in  the  East  and  by  some  of  the  Eastern  Senators  in  dis¬ 
cussions  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate;  and  I  observe  that  they  have 
objected  to  the  East  being  taxed  for  the  benefit  of  the  West,  taking 
the  view  that  the  expenditure  of  the  moneys  of  the  National  Govern-l 
ment  for  the  development  of  the  West  by  irrigation  was  a  measure\ 
entirely  for  the  benefit  of  the  West. 

The  bill  to  which  Mr.  Newlands  refers,  and  a  copy  of  which  I  have 
seen,  seems  to  me  to  obviate  the  objection  that  the  East  would  be 
taxed  for  the  benefit  of  the  West.  In  other  words,  as  I  understand 
the  measure,  it  is  not  proposed  to  put  any  burden  at  all  upon  the 
Eastern  taxpayer.  The  proposition  is  merely  that  the  proceeds  of  the 
sales  of  lands  in  the  arid  region  shall  be  used  to  create  a  fund  for  the 
gradual  reclamation  of  the  arid  region;  that  wherever  moneys  are 
invested  in  construction  the  lands  shall  be  sold  for  a  sufficient  price 
to  cover  the  cost  of  construction,  and  that  the  price,  when  paid,  shall 
be  returned  into  the  fund,  so  that  the  fund  would  be  gradually  increas¬ 
ing  from  year  to  year.  In  the  working  out  of  the  plan  all  moneys 
temporarily  withdrawn  would  be  gradually  returned  to  the  Treasury. 

I  apprehend  that  there  is  no  ground  for  a  contrary  argument  to  the 
proposition  that  there  are  many  locations  in  the  W est  where  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  can  undoubtedly  build  an  irrigation  system,  or  at  least  the 
large  main-line  canals  and  reservoirs,  and  dispose  of  the  land  for  a 
sufficient  sum  to  entirely  cover  the  cost  of  construction.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  are  undoubtedly  many  millions  of  acres  of  Government 
land  which  it  is  not  feasible  to  undertake  to  reclaim  under  that  plan, 
for  the  reason  that  it  is  almost  impossible  for  the  Government  to  so 
control  the  water  supplies  which  would  be  created  by  storage  as  to 
limit  their  use  to  any  specific  area  of  Government  land.  I  mention 


32 


ABID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


that  fact  iii  order  that  my  position  may  he  well  understood — that  while 
this  proposed  measure  of  Mr.  Newlands  is,  in  my  judgment,  one  that 
has  great  merit,  and  would  in  many  localities  solve  difficulties  which 
are  otherwise  unsolvable,  and  is  a  measure  to  which,  it  seems  to  me, 
no  reasonable  objection  can  be  made  from  any  quarter  of  the  United 
States,  at  the  same  time  it  can  not  be  considered  as  a  complete  solu¬ 
tion  of  the  whole  problem.  I  might  illustrate,  in  order  that  my  idea 
may  be  made  plain,  as  I  pass  along  the  conditions  in  Wyoming  and 
Nebraska,  or  Colorado  and  Arkansas.  There  are,  no  doubt,  very  large 
areas  of  land  in  those  States  which  could  be  irrigated  from  reservoirs 
in  the  Rockv  Mountains,  which  the  Federal  Government  will  have  to 
construct  if  they  ever  are  constructed,  which  could  not  be  reclaimed 
under  the  plan  proposed  in  Mr.  Newlands’s  bill,  for  the  reason  that 
the  reservoir — the  head  of  supply — is  so  remote  from  the  place  where 
itlie  waters  would  be  used  that  it  would  be  an  impossibility  to  connect 
•the  two  and  sell  the  land  which  that  particular  water  supply  would 
irrigate  for  sufficient  monej7  to  pay  for  building  the  reservoir.  In 
other  words,  some  other  plan  must  be  devised  for  covering  that  branch 
of  the  subject. 

But  coming  back  to  Mr.  Newlands’s  bill.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
as  to  large  areas  of  country,  more  particularly  in  the  Southwest — I 
have  mentioned  several  locations  in  Nevada,  in  Arizona,  and  in 
southern  California — it  is  a  perfectly  feasible  and  sound  proposition. 
I  believe  to-day  that  some  measure  of  that  kind  is  the  only  solution 
of  the  reclamation  of  the  Territory  of  Arizona.  Now,  there  is  a  Ter¬ 
ritory  which  is  as  large  as  the  whole  Philippine  Archipelago,  and  it 
will,  beyond  question,  support  as  large  a  population  as  the  Philippine 
Islands,  provided  that  all  the  water  which  to-day  runs  to  waste  can 
be  saved  and  utilized. 

There  is  a  measure  pending  in  the  Senate  providing  for  the  con¬ 
struction  of  a  reservoir  on  the  Gila  River.  Now,  the  investigations 
of  that  stream  have  shown,  and  the  engineer’s  report,  that  only  3  per 
cent  of  the  total  flow  of  that  river  is  to-day  utilized  or  available  for 
use.  You  can  imagine  what  the  conditions  would  be  if  the  area  irri¬ 
gated  and  the  population  sustained  by  irrigation  from  the  Gila  River 
were  increased  97  per  cent. 

There  is  a  location  which  this  bill  of  Mr.  Newlands  would  exactly 
fit,  because  the  Government  controls  the  water  suppty  and  the  reser¬ 
voir  sites.  It  can  specifically  designate  the  land  that  that  water  shall 
be  used  upon.  It  can  put  the  land  upon  the  market  in  small  tracts 
and  sell  it,  with  the  water  right,  for  more  money  than  all  the  irriga¬ 
tion  works  will  cost.  I  find  that  in  the  discussion  of  these  subjects 
the  difficulties  that  arise  come,  nine  times  out  of  ten,  from  the  fact 
that  some  one  has  taken  a  mere  broad  generalization  of  the  subject 
without  getting  down  to  specific  propositions — I  wish  not  to  diverge, 
but  to  call  attention  in  passing,  to  an  objection  that  was  made  in  the 
Senate  yesterday.  Senator  Platt  of  Connecticut  and  Senator  Quarles 
of  Wisconsin  both  raised  the  objection  to  this  specific  proposition  on 
the  ground  that  a  general  or  comprehensive  plan  should  be  brought 
in  for  consideration. 

No  man  alive  to-day  will  see  this  problem  solved  if  we  are  obliged 
to  wait  before  we  do  anything  until  we  can  create  a  comprehensive 
scheme  of  national  irrigation  which  will  be  sufficiently  flexible  to  fit 
every  locality  and  suit  every  objection.  We  must  begin  with  locali¬ 
ties.  I  apprehend  that  one  reason  why  I  have  been  led  to  study  these 
different  phases  of  the  problem  perhaps  more  than  others  lies  in  the 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


33 


very  fact  that  California,  my  native  State,  possesses  such  diversified 
conditions  that  what  fits  one  part  of  the  State  will  not  fit  another. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  Pardon  me  just  one  moment.  I  live  in  Nebraska. 
What  suggestions  have  you  for  western  Nebraska  and  eastern  W}ro- 
ming? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Confining  it  to  western  Nebraska,  first,  artesian 
wells;  second,  the  storage  of  the  flood  waters  of  the  streams  until  they 
are  absolutely  controlled  and  regulated  for  use.  In  other  words,  when 
the  Government  builds  storage  reservoirs  in  Montana  and  Wyoming, 
it  can  not  undertake  to  distribute  that  water  to  specific  localities. 
They  must  be  turned  into  streams  and  left  to  be  taken  care  of  by  the 
irrigators  during  their  entire  course. 

Mr.  Barham.  Now,  Mr.  Maxwell,  this  point  of  objection  has  sug¬ 
gested  itself  to  my  mind  to  the  proposition  made  by  Mr.  Newlands  of 
selling  the  land  at  so  much  an  acre - 

Mr.  Newlands.  Pardon  me,  selling  the  land  simply  at  the  propor¬ 
tionate  cost  of  the  project. 

Mr.  Barham.  Well,  say  $10  an  acre. 

Mr.  Newlands.  It  would  run  from  $5  to  $10  an  acre,  to  be  paid  in 
ten  annual  installments. 

Mr.  Barham.  Now  that,  of  course,  is  only  applicable  to  the  sale  of 
lands  belonging  to  the  United  States,  but  you  must  recollect  that  the 
point  is  going  to  be  made  that  under  the  scheme  proposed  by  Mr.  New¬ 
lands  the  State  lands,  the  school  lands,  the  university  lands,  the  lands 
now  held  in  private  ownership,  and  the  railroad  lands  (which  lie  in 
every  alternate  section  on  either  side  of  the  line  of  the  railroad,  I 
believe  20  miles  on  each  side,  constituting  an  immense  volume  of  land) 
are  going  to  be  benefited  without  any  compensation  to  the  Treasury 
for  carrying  out  this  scheme. 

My  suggestion  is,  instead  of  the  plan  proposed  here,  why  not  simply 
take  the  proposition  as  it  presents  itself  boldly,  and  take  money  out 
of  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  to  carry  on  this  plan,  and  then 
assess  the  owners  of  these  lands  (railroads  and  everybody  else)  75 
cents  or  $1  an  acre  until  all  the  fund  is  returned  to  the  Treasury  of 
the  United  States? 

Mr.  Newlands.  This  bill  provides  that,  as  to  lands  now  in  private 
ownership,  water  rights  can  be  acquired  by  paying  the  same  amount 
that  the  entryman  of  public  lands  pays,  and  in  the  same  annual  in¬ 
stallments — provided  there  is  enough  water  to  go  around,  the  public 
lands  being  served  first.  It  also  provides  that  no  water  right  shall  be 
granted  to  any  man  for  more  than  80  acres — thus  compelling  the 
railroads  and  other  large  holders  to  divide  up  their  lands  for  actual 
settlers. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  understood  that  that  point  had  been  covered  by 
the  bill.  That  is  one  of  the  most  important  points. 

Mr.  Barham.  Yes;  that  point  is  going  to  be  raised  all  along  the 
line. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  am  glad  you  suggested  it  here,  because  it  is  one 
that  is  coming  up  and  one  that  it  is  difficult  to  provide  for;  there  is 
no  question  about  that.  At  the  same  time,  it  has  always  seemed  to 
me  that  the  argument  that  by  anv  possibility  some  private  lands  might 
be  benefited  by  the  Government  construction  of  irrigation  works  could 
not  be  allowed  to  hold  back  a  great  national  improvement,  any  more 
than  the  argument  that,  for  instance,  building  the  San  Pedro  Harbor 
or  the  Eureka  Harbor  might  benefit  private  properties  in  the  States 

11196—01 - 3 


34 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


where  they  are  located,  should  be  a  reason  for  saying  “You  shall  not 
build  the  harbor!” 

Mr.  Mondell.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  oftentimes  a  harbor  improve¬ 
ment  which  is  a  charge  against  the  Treasury,  and  in  return  for  which 
the  Government  receives  no  direct  benefit  or  revenue,  inures  to  the 
benefit  of  individuals  owning  wharfage  property  to  the  extent  of  mil¬ 
lions  of  dollars? 

Mr.  Wilson.  The  cleaning  out  of  the  Buttermilk  Channel  is  a  nota¬ 
ble  instance  of  that  principle. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes;  a  very  notable  instance,  where,  undoubtedly, 
millions  upon  millions  will  be  added  to  the  value  of  private  property 
without  any  thought  of  return. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  But  it  seems  to  me  that  the  suggestion  made  by 
Judge  Barham,  which,  as  I  understand,  is  incorporated  in  this  bill, 
covers  that  proposition  under  this  plan  of  development. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  want  to  state  further,  Judge  Barham,  that,  as  a 
general  rule,  I  think  the  railroad  has  parted  with  all  its  lands  within 
reach  of  the  stream  that  are  capable  of  irrigation. 

Mr.  Barham.  At  the  same  time,  we  can  not  put  money  into  the 
Treasury  from  the  sale  of  those  lands,  because  they  are  already  sold; 
they  belong  to  the  railroad. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  But  you  will  observe,  gentlemen,  that  the  bill  pro¬ 
vides  for  returning  to  the  Treasury  the  money  from  the  sale  of  the 
right  to  the  use  of  the  water,  and  not  necessarily  from  the  sale  of  the 
land.  If  it  is  to  be  taken  up  by  homestead  entry  the  land  itself  would 
go  free  to  the  entryman,  but  the  value  is  in  the  water;  and  that  fea¬ 
ture  of  it,  it  seems  to  me,  is  covered  in  that  point. 

Mr.  Newlands.  By  the  way,  Mr.  Maxwell,  Judge  Barham  made 
this  suggestion  to  me  before  you  came  in.  He  insists  upon  it  that  it 
would  be  better  to  face  the  question  boldly,  to  ask  from  the  General 
Government  adequate  appropriations  for  this  work  from  year  to  year 
as  a  legitimate  Government  work.  Now,  my  answer  to  him  was  that 
of  course  I  favored  that  proposition,  but  that  the  purpose  of  this  bill 
was  to  remove  the  objections  of  ignorance. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  There  is  one  suggestion  upon  that  point  that  I 
would  like  to  make,  and  that  is  this:  The  objection  is  frequently 
made  on  the  part  of  the  East  that  measures  of  this  kind  will  result  in 
an  abnormal  and  sudden  development  of  the  West,  and  that  they  will 
put  things  out  of  balance  and  perhaps  be  to  the  detriment  of  the  East¬ 
ern  agricultural  interests. 

I  believe  that  the  construction  of  a  few  of  these  irrigation  systems 
will  be  such  a  complete  demonstration  of  the  unsoundness  of  that 
view,  that  if  we  could  get  started  upon  a  perfectly  just  basis  of  taking- 
only  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of  arid  lands  and  building  these  sys¬ 
tems,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  results  are  so  different  from  what  some 
of  the  opponents  of  the  idea  have  contended  that  they  will  withdraw 
their  opposition.  I  will  try  to  make  that  clear  by  an  illustration, 
taking  the  case  of  the  San  Carlos  reservoir  in  Arizona.  If  the  House 
assents  to  the  measure  passed  by  the  Senate,  that  reservoir  will  be 
built  in  Arizona.  The  result  will  be  that  an  area  of  100,000  acres  of 
land  will  be  subdivided  into  small  farms,  probably  20-acre  farms,  with 
an  ample  supply  of  water.  The  people  who  will  go  on  those  farms 
will  produce  fruits  (deciduous  and  possibly  citrus),  raisins,  poultry, 
eggs,  and  butter.  They  will  not  raise  stock  to  any  considerable 
extent,  because  the  land  is  too  valuable  to  be  devoted  to  that  purpose. 
The  result  of  the  development  will  be  that  the  products  of  those  farms 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


35 


will  be  so  different  from  the  products  of  Eastern  agriculture  that  there 
will  be  no  possibility  of  anv  competition  with  Eastern  agriculture. 
On  the  other  hand,  Eastern  agriculture  will  be  benefited,  because* 
every  home  that  is  built  in  the  Gila  Valley,  in  Arizona,  is  a  market  for' 
the  manufacturer  of  the  East. 

I  was  in  Boston  within  the  last  week  and  made  an  address  at  a  ban¬ 
quet  of  the  Boston  Merchants’  Club.  I  called  their  attention  to  that 
unfortunate  misunderstanding  of  this  project  on  the  part  of  some 
people  of  the  East.  From  Albany  to  Boston  and  from  Boston  back 
to  New  York  the  railroad  is  simply  lined  with  the  great  factories  which 
produce  the  products  that  are  consumed  in  the  West.  The  mallet 
that  drives  the  farmer’s  post  in  the  ground,  the  wire  on  the  fence,  the 
plow  that  tills  his  ground,  the  wagon  that  hauls  his  implements,  the 
nails  in  his  house,  the  glass  in  the  windows,  the  screws  in  the  doors, 
the  clothes  on  his.  back — everything  the  man  who  goes  into  Arizona  onj 
any  of  that  reclaimed  land  uses  is  to  be  furnished  to  him  by  the  East-1 
ern  manufacturer. 

The  Chairman.  And  you  might  have  gone  on  and  named  the  spade 
that  digs  his  grave,  and  the  hearse  that  takes  his  body  to  it,  and  the 
coffin  that  incloses  him.  [Laughter.] 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Yes;  and  I  might  have  gone  further  than  that,  and 
said  that  the  swaddling  clothes  that  wrap  the  children  when  they  are 
born  there  will  come  from  the  East. 

What  is  the  result  of  all  that?  What  is  the  best  market  for  the 
Eastern  farmer  to-day?  It  is  in  the  factories  of  the  East.  Take  the 
factories  out  of  New  England,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania  to-day 
and  the  Eastern  agriculturist  of  those  States  might  just  as  well  pack 
his  blankets  and  take  to  the  road.  Every  new  home  that  is  built  in 
the  West,  whether  it  is  from  the  British  Columbian  line  to  the  Mexi¬ 
can  line  or  from  the  ninety-eighth  meridian  to  the  Pacific  Ocean — I 
do  not  care  where  it  is — is  a  positive,  absolute  advantage  to  the  East¬ 
ern  agriculturist.  There  is  no  getting  away  from  the  argument. 

Mr.  Barham.  My  point  is  that  if  we  make  the  people  understand 
that  fact  they  will  be  only  too  anxious  to  join  us  in  going  into  this 
broad,  comprehensive  scheme. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  That  is  my  idea,  Judge;  and  I  think  that  if  we  can 
do  it  some  plan  can  be  reported  out  of  this  committee  so  that  it  can 
be  discussed  with  the  people.  I  believe  Mr.  Newlands’s  bill  has  this 
merit — that  while  it  is  not  a  complete  solution  of  the  problem,  it  is  a 
measure  which  will  be  less  objected  to  by  the  people  of  the  East  than 
any  other.  I  believe  that  if  it  is  enacted  and  put  into  force  the  benefit 
to  the  commercial  interests  of  the  whole  country  and  to  the  Eastern 
agriculturist  will  be  demonstrated  by  actual  experience  under  it  in 
such  a  manner  that  when  we  come  before  Congress  with  a  plan  and 
estimate  for  a  great  system  of  work  which  has  been  carefully  surveyed, 
planned,  and  estimated  upon  by  the  Geological  Survey,  and  say  to  the 
people  of  the  East,  “Now,  there  is  a  great  tract  of  land  which  can  be 
reclaimed,  but  which  requires  work  costing  too  much  money  to  be 
built  under  this  bill;  we  want  more  money  to  go  into  that  fund,  to 
enlarge  the  revolving  fund,”  it  will  not  be  opposed. 

Mr.  Barham.  To  how  large  an  extent  does  the  title  to  the  arid 
lands  which  are  capable  of  irrigation  still  remain  in  the  Government? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  The  estimates  differ.  The  estimate  of  the  Secre¬ 
tary  of  the  Interior,  in  his  last  annual  report,  was  74,000,000  acres. 
The  estimate  of  Major  Powell,  when  he  was  the  Director  of  the  Geolog¬ 
ical  Survey,  was  100,000,000  acres.  I  am  very  glad  you  called  attention 


36 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


to  that  point,  because  I  want  to  state  something  which,  in  my  opinion, 
is  one  of  the  most  important  features  of  this  whole  movement,  and 
one  that  is  very  rarely  referred  to.  That  is,  that  after  water  is  taken 
out  and  used  for  the  irrigation  of  a  specific  area  of  land,  the  country 
gradually  becomes  saturated  with  water,  and  surface  irrigation  to  a 
very  large  extent  becomes  unnecessary;  and  the  same  surface  supply 
will  go  on  and  on  and  on  enlarging  the  area  under  irrigation  until  the 
whole  condition  of  the  country  has  been  completely  transformed. 

Mr.  Barham.  Yes;  there  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  There  is  no  man  in  California  who  stands  higher 
in  the  estimation  of  the  people,  or  who  has  a  closer  knowledge  of  the 
San  Joaquin  Valley,  than  Dr.  Chester  H.  Rowell,  of  Fresno.  I  drove 
through  the  Fresno  colonies  with  Dr.  Rowell,  and  we  were  talking  on 
/his  subject,  and  he  called  my  attention  to  farm  after  farm  where 
there  was  no  surface  irrigation  whatever. 

Mr.  Newlands.  This  was  land  that  had  been  previously  desert 
land,  was  it  not? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Land  which  had  previously  been  absolutely  desert 
land.  It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  the  country  where  Fresno  stands 
to-day  was  originally  a  desert,  arid  waste,  where  sheep  had  to  scram¬ 
ble  for  a  living  in  a  good  year,  and  cattle  and  sheep  starved  in  a  dry 
year.  To-day  there  are  thousands  of  acres  of  land  there  where  the 
problem  is  not  one  of  irrigation,  but  one  of  drainage;  and  there  is 
seriously  agitated  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  to-day  the  question  of 
the  construction  of  a  great  drainage  canal  to  drain  off  the  irrigating 
water.  In  the  city  of  Tulare,  when  the  white  people  first  went  in 
there,  the  water  table  was  75  to  100  feet  below  the  surface  of  the 
ground.  To-day  you  can  not  pump  a  well  dry;  you  can  not  pump  it 
down  a  foot.  When  you  get  down  10  or  15  feet  the  whole  country 
has  become  a  great  sponge. 

What  is  the  inference  from  those  facts?  Suppose  we  have  to-day 
water  enough  to  irrigate  74,000,000  acres  of  land.  If  all  the  water 
available  is  utilized,  I  believe  that  in  less  than  fifty  years  you  will 
have  150,000,000  acres  irrigated.  The  proposition  is  not  a  chimerical 
one  at  all ;  it  is  simply  a  fact  that  in  course  of  time  the  whole  country 
becomes  a  great  sponge. 

Taking  up  this  question  of  reservoirs,  I  will  give  you  a  most  remark¬ 
able  illustration.  When  I  was  in  Arizona  last  December  I  was  shown 
photographs  of  a  peach  orchard  and  a  peach  crop  which  was  raised 
without  one  drop  of  summer  irrigation;  they  had  winter-irrigated  it 
with  8  feet  of  water.  That  means  that  there  was  put  on  the  orchard 
an  amount  of  water  in  the  winter  season  which  would  have  stood  eight 
feet  above  the  ground  if  it  had  all  been  there  at  one  time. 

Mr.  Newlands.  That  was  during  the  period  of  floods? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Yes;  they  put  it  in  in  the  period  of  flood.  In 
other  words,  if  they  had  built  a  fence  8  feet  high  all  around  that  land, 
the  water  would  have  filled  it  up  to  the  top,  and  would  have  sunk 
right  down  into  the  ground.  That  can  not  be  done  except  in  very 
porous  land,  where  the  subsoil  is  open,  so  that  the  water  will  go  down 
and  go  out.  But  they  had  8  feet  of  water  on  that  orchard,  and  not  a 
drop  of  summer  irrigation;  and  they  had  a  magnificent  crop  of 
peaches. 

To  illustrate  again :  The  largest  single  reservoir  in  Arizona  will  hold 
in  the  neighborhood  of  800,000  acre-feet  of  water.  That  means  that  if 
you  could  use  the  whole  storage  capacity  it  would  cover  100,000  acres  of 
land  with  winter  irrigation  8  feet  in  depth.  When  you  have  1,000,000 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


37 


acres  of  Government  land  under  that  reservoir,  it  is  perfectly  easy  to 
see  that  by  building  canals  yon  could  take  the  whole  flood  supply  of 
the  river  out  and  sink  it  into  the  land.  You  can  not  fill  the  land  in 
one  year;  you  would  never  know  the  water  had  been  put  on  the  tract; 
but  keep  on  doing  this  year  after  j^ear,  and  in  fifty  years  you  will  get 
the  whole  country  full  of  water.  When  water  goes  down  into  the  soil 
it  does  not  stay  there.  It  does  not  go  through  to  the  other  side  of  the 
earth,  nor  does  it  drop  down  in  the  center.  It  keeps  coming  out. 
The  consequence  is  that  when  the  country  fills  up  with  water  in  that 
way  the  rivers  are  replenished,  and  there  is  a  steady  stream  flowing 
in  the  dry  season  from  the  seepage  from  this  underground  supply 
created  by  filling  up  this  arid  land  with  water. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  quite  agree  with  you  that  this  plan  may  be  not 
operative  with  reference  to  some  of  these  great  enterprises  where  the 
land  is  far  away  from  the  storage  to  be  accomplished.  But  in  that 
event  the  Government  could  recompense  itself  by  charging  a  higher 
price  for  the  Government  land.  This  plan  might  not  be  practicable 
to  parts  of  California.  Take  the  King  River,  for  instance,  where  they 
have  been  suffering  greatly  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  by  reason  of 
the  scarcity  of  water  during  July  and  August.  Suppose  the  Geolog¬ 
ical  Survey  should  project  a  reservoir  on  King  River,  and  we  will 
assume  that  all  the  land  below,  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley,  except  a 
very  small  portion,  is  in  private  occupancy.  There  is  not  enough 
public  land  to  pay  for  that  enterprise.  Do  you  not  think  that  the 
people  would  come  forward  with  some  proposition  and  say,  “We  will 
purchase  so  many  water  rights,  and  pay  for  them  at  the  rate  of  a  dollar 
per  annum  for  ten  years,  if  you  will  go  on  with  the  work ;  ”  and  in 
that  way,  even  though  a  large  portion  of  the  land  is  in  private  occu¬ 
pancy,  you  would  secure  the  fund  that  would  be  necessary  for  the 
work? 

Mr.  Barham.  Wait  for  the  returns  to  come  in  in  regard  to  all 
these  different  projects;  and  as  they  are  returned,  let  them  be  taken 
up  as  they  come  in  year  after  jTear? 

Mr.  Wilson.  I  move  that  Mr.  Maxwell  be  requested  to  extend  his 
remarks  in  the  Record. 

(The  motion  was  seconded  and  unanimously  carried.) 

Thereupon,  at  12.05  o’clock  p.  ml,  the  committee  adjourned  until 
Thursday,  January  31,  1901,  at  10  o’clock  a.  m. 


Washington,  D.  C.,  January  31 ,  1901. 

The  committee  met,  pursuant  to  adjournment,  Hon.  John  A.  Barham 
(acting  chairman)  in  the  chair. 

Mr.  Barham.  I  understand  that  it  is  the  order  of  the  committee 
that  we  should  proceed  with  the  hearing  and  that  a  quorum  should  be 
considered  as  present.  If  there  is  anyone  who  can  enlighten  us  upon 
this  subject,  we  will  be  glad  to  hear  them. 

STATEMENT  OF  NELSON  H.  DARTON,  GEOLOGIST,  UNITED  STATES 

GEOLOGICAL  SURVEY. 

Mr.  Darton.  I  have  spent  several  years  in  making  a  study  of  the 
underground  water  supply  of  the  arid  portion  of  the  Central  Plains 
region.  The  investigation  has  been  conducted  as  a  portion  of  the 
work  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey. 


38 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Reeder.  You  spent  considerable  time,  I  believe,  last  autumn 
in  northwest  Kansas? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  and  in  the  adjoining  portions  of  Colorado 
and  Nebraska,  studying  this  problem  of  underground  water  supply 
and  ascertaining  what  had  been  done  in  the  way  of  sinking  wells. 
The  great  Central  Plains  are  underlain  throughout  their  entire  extent 
by  a  vast  sheet  of  Dakota  sandstone,  which  appears  to  be  full  of  water 
everywhere.  This  sheet  of  sandstone  is  upturned  under  the  flanks  of 
the  Rocky  Mountains,  where  the  water  goes  into  the  sandstone.  This 
sheet  has  always  been  found  full  of  water  and  to  yield  great  flow  to 
wells  which  have  been  sunk  into  it.  It  extends  under  the  Great  Plains, 
all  the  way  across,  eastward  from  the  flanks  of  the  Rocky  Mountains, 
the  Bighorn  Mountains,  and  the  Black  Hills.  On  the  flanks  of  these 
mountains  a  great  volume  of  water  sinks  underground  into  the  sand¬ 
stone,  and  wherever  wells  are  sunk  sufficiently  deep  to  reach  this 
sandstone  it  yields  an  abundant  water  supply. 

Mr.  Reeder.  You  say  that  the  principal  wells  to  this  formation  are 
north  of  the  district  I  represent  in  Kansas? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Reeder.  Have  you  examined  the  conditions  in  the  district 
which  I  represent? 

Mr.  Darton.  We  have,  as  far  as  the  south  line  of  Kansas  and  Col¬ 
orado. 

Mr.  Reeder.  Do  you  find  this  same  sandstone  in  the  same  relations 
there? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  the  same. 

Mr.  Reeder.  How  have  you  determined  it,  so  far  as  Kansas  is  con¬ 
cerned  ;  by  boring  down  to  the  water? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  many  of  the  wells  have  penetrated  to  the 
sandstone.  Besides,  there  is  a  surface  outcrop  of  it  extending  across 
the  central  portion  of  the  State.  There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  this 
sandstone  passes  under  the  Great  Plains  as  a  continuous  sheet.  There 
is,  however,  no  way  to  demonstrate  the  water  conditions  under  those 
sections  which  have  not  had  deep  wells  driven  in  them,  except  to  bore 
experimental  wells.  In  the  Arkansas  Valley,  in  eastern  Colorado, 
and  at  the  western  margin  of  Kansas  man}7  wells  have  been  sunk,  and 
they  have  yielded  the  same  abundant  flow  of  water  everywhere.  Out 
Northwest,  in  Dakota,  many  wells  are  producing  an  enormous  amount 
of  water  from  the  same  bed  of  sandstone.  In  portions  of  eastern 
Nebraska,  where  the  sandstone  is  near  the  surface,  there  are  innu¬ 
merable  wells  which  furnish  an  abundant  water  supply. 

Mr.  Reeder.  Do  they  furnish  a  sufficient  amount  of  water  to  be  of 
value  for  farming  purposes? 

Mr.  Darton.  In  some  cases,  in  South  Dakota,  they  furnish  enough 
for  the  irrigation  of  a  whole  section  of  land  from  one  well.  There  are 
single  wells  there  that  flow  nearly  4,000  gallons  of  water,  a  minute, 
and  that  is  sufficient  to  much  more  than  irrigate  a  square  mile  of  land. 
The  water  flows  out  over  the  surface,  and  except  on  the  very  highest 
land,  is  under  considerable  pressure.  There  is,  however,  a  large  area 
in  western  Nebraska,  western  Kansas,  and  in  a  portion  of  eastern 
Colorado  which  has  not  been  explored  underground.  In  many  places 
wells  have  been  sunk  to  a  depth  of  1,000  feet  and  they  have  obtained 
a  small  water  supply,  but  not  penetrated  deep  enough  to  reach  the 
Dakota  sandstone,  or  at  least  to  thoroughly  test  its  resources  as  a 
water  bearer.  There  is  a  region  in  northwestern  Kansas,  the  Oberlin 
region,  where  the  top  of  the  sandstone  appears  to  have  been  reached 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


39 


at  a  depth  of  1,000  feet.  It  yielded  a  flow  of  water  which  is  too  saline 
for  use,  but  it  is  believed  that  penetrating  further  into  the  sandstone 
at  that  place  there  will  be  obtained  water  of  a  better  quality.  Usu¬ 
ally  the  water  is  of  an  excellent  quality. 

Sir.  Reeder.  That  is  why  I  was  inquiring  whether  there  had  been 
any  observations  made  that  would  show  that  this  water-bearing  sand¬ 
stone  crosses  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  and  you  say  that  as  it  has  been 
found  farther  south,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  it  underlies  all 
of  the  western  portion  of  Kansas;  but  absolutely  there  is  no  way  to 
know  about  this  except  to  bore. 

Mr.  Darton.  That  is  the  only  way  to  find  out  whether  it  would 
furnish  a  flow  of  water  of  good  quality.  The  plan  is  now  to  sink 
wells  to  thoroughly  test  the  amount  of  water,  its  head,  so  as  to  ascer¬ 
tain  where  it  will  give  surface  flow,  and  its  character;  that  is  to  say 
its  suitability  for  domestic  purposes,  and  for  stock,  etc.  A  certain 
number  of  wells  sunk  at  wide  intervals  through  the  Central  Plains 
region  would  give  us  most  valuable  information  as  to  the  conditions 
over  a  very  wide  area  now  greatly  in  need  of  suitable  water  supplies. 

The  precise  area  to  which  I  refer  is  the  western  half  of  the  State  of 
Nebraska,  the  western  half  of  Kansas,  the  eastern  half  of  Colorado, 
the  southwestern  corner  of  South  Dakota,  and  the  southeastern  corner 
of  Wyoming.  That  is  the  area  to  which  our  investigation  applies, 
and  the  one  in  which  we  believe  experimental  wells  will  throw  a  great 
light  on  the  general  water-supply  problem.  There  are  many  points 
in  this  area  in  which  wells  may  be  expected  to  be  successful  and  by 
their  success  give  encouragement  to  individuals  to  sink  wells. 

The  Chairman.  What  is  the  cost  of  sinking  a  well  and  preparing 
it  for  irrigation,  a  thousand  feet  deep? 

Mr.  Darton.  Three  or  four  thousand  dollars,  ordinarily;  that  is, 
under  favorable  conditions. 

Mr.  Reeder.  The  borings  already  made  indicate  that  in  the  section 
of  Kansas  I  represent  wells  1,000  feet  deep  would  not  be  sufficient, 
but  do  you  not  think  that  wells  2,000  feet  deep  would  test  the  matter 
thoroughly? 

The  Chairman.  What  would  they  cost? 

Mr.  Darton.  Ten  thousand  dollars  would  pay  for  a  properly  con¬ 
structed  deep  well. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Assuming  a  well  2,000  feet  deep  would  cost  $10,000, 
would  there  be  a  sufficient  return  from  the  water  to  warrant  that 
expenditure? 

Mr.  Darton.  The  water  itself  from  such  a  well  ought  to  be  of  value 
sufficient  to  compensate  for  its  expense,  but  then  the  light  it  is  to 
throwT  on  the  underground  relations  and  position  of  the  Dakota  sand¬ 
stone  and  its  water  contents  would  be  the  principal  feature  of  the 
experiment. 

The  Chairman.  -  How  much  would  such  a  well  irrigate? 

Mr.  Darton.  It  is  extremely  difficult  to  tell,  for  we  can  not  predict 
in  advance  how  much  flow  will  be  obtained. 

Mr.  Reeder.  You  state  that  some  of  these  wells  in  southern  Dakota 
are  capable  of  irrigating  a  whole  section  of  land,  but  we  do  not  know 
that  it  will  be  that  much  in  Kansas,  and  what  we  want  to  know  is 
whether  it  will  justify  our  people,  as  private  individuals,  in  going  to 
that  expense. 

Mr.  Phillips.  We  can  tell  by  putting  down  a  well. 

The  Chairman.  You  say  one  well  in  eastern  South  Dakota  will  irri¬ 
gate  a  square  mile  of  land? 


40 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  under  favorable  conditions. 

Mr.  Newlands.  In  South  Dakota,  where  these  wells  have  been 
developed,  how  many  wells  are  there,  and  what  area  of  land  is  irri¬ 
gated  by  them? 

Mr.  Darton.  I  have  returns  from  about  300  deep  wells  in  south¬ 
eastern  Dakota,  and  the  number  of  quarter  sections  irrigated  there 
now  is  about  100. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Do  you  know  what  the  average  cost  of  those  wells 
has  been? 

Mr.  Dart6n.  Two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  on  the  average, 
or  possibly  $3,000.  The  conditions  are  very  favorable  in  that  section. 

Mr.  Newlands.  What  kind  of  wells  are  sunk  there? 

Mr.  Darton.  Various  kinds.  In  many  cases  the  wells  are  shallow, 
but  the  number  of  very  deep  wells  is  about  120. 

Mr.  Reeder.  What  do  you  mean  by  very  deep? 

Mr.  Darton.  Fourteen  to  sixteen  hundred  feet  deep.  On  some  of 
the  higher  lands  they  are  deeper. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Is  it  your  opinion  that  the  Dakota  sandstone 
formation  continues  through  western  Kansas,  and  Nebraska  and 
Colorado? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  there  seems  to  be  no  doubt  about  it;  we  see 
it  upturned  against  the  Rocky  Mountains  in  Colorado,  and  outcrop¬ 
ping  in  portions  of  the  Arkansas  Valley,  and  it  has  been  penetrated 
by  many  wells  in  the  Arkansas  Valley.  In  central  Kansas  it  has 
been  reached  by  a  number  of  shallow  wells. 

Mr.  Reeder.  It  has  been  observed  on  four  sides  of  the  territory  we 
are  talking  about. 

Mr.  Darton.  Exactly. 

The  Chairman.  Now,  in  the  wells  where  experimentation  has  been 
made  and  proved  successful  among  the  farmers  they  have  been 
extremely  useful? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir.  Their  greatest  usefulness  has  been  the  sup¬ 
ply  of  water  for  stock;  but,  as  before  stated,  they  have  been  used  in 
eastern  South  Dakota  for  irrigation,  and  their  great  pressure  also 
furnishes  power  to  run  electric-light  plants,  flouring  mills,  etc.  The 
wells  in  the  Arkansas  Valley  which  reach  the  sandstone  and  furnish 
large  volumes  of  water  are  used  not  only  for  local  water  supply  but  to 
supply  small  towns.  The  water  of  the  Arkansas  River  is  not  agree¬ 
able  to  use,  and  the  smaller  sources  of  water  supply — springs,  etc. — 
are  not  adequate,  so  these  artesian  wells  have  been  sunk  and  furnish 
a  fine  supply  from  the  sandstone;  now  nearly  every  little  town  in  the 
Arkansas  Vallejq  in  eastern  Colorado,  has  an  artesian  well  as  a  source 
of  water  supply. 

AVe  are  not  altogether  certain  as  to  the  depth  to  the  Dakota  sand¬ 
stone  in  all  portions  of  the  Central  Plains  region.  There  is  a  mass  of 
overlying  clays  of  1,500  feet  and  more  in  some  places,  and  there  is  an 
extensive  area  in  which  no  wells  have  been  sunk  sufficiently  deep  to 
penetrate  these  clays  and  reach  the  Dakota  sandstone.  Many  wells 
have  been  sunk  to  a  moderate  depth,  but  have  found  the  clay  so  diffi¬ 
cult  to  penetrate  that  boring  operations  have  been  discontinued  on 
account  of  the  expense  and  uncertainties.  If  wells  could  be  sunk 
through  the  clays  to  the  Dakota  sandstone  and  a  water  supply  obtained, 
it  would  encourage  many  persons  to  sink  wells  all  over  this  region  for 
themselves.  You  can  not  expect  them  to  sink  these  wells  without 
feeling  certain  that  they  will  get  a  water  supply. 

Mr.  Barham.  AVherever  these  wells  have  been  sunk  is  there  any 
danger  of  the  water  being  exhausted  ?  I  have  heard  that  wells  some- 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


41 


times  are  exhausted  and  give  out  in  a  short  time  and  that  the  well 
proposition  was  a  failure. 

Mr.  Darton.  That  has  not  proved  to  be  the  case  in  southwestern 
Dakota,  where  there  are  many  wells  together  in  a  small  area.  In  the 
vicinity  of  Denver,  Colorado,  where  there  is  a  local  artesian  basin,  the 
water  now  has  to  be  pumped  and  has  ceased  to  flow  spontaneously. 
It  has  happened  there,  but  the  cause  of  it  is  the  small  size  of  that 
artesian  basin. 

Mr.  Barham.  Is  it  only  in  an  artesian  basin  that  you  get  artesian 
water? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir.  Where  you  get  flowing  water  there  has  to 
be  an  elevated  source  for  it  on  one  side  at  least. 

Mr.  Barham.  And  in  this  Central  Plains  region  you  are  talking 
about  now,  is  it  not  artesian  water? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir,  it  is;  that  is,  it  is  water  under  great  pres¬ 
sure,  which  causes  it  to  rise  above  the  surface  or  toward  the  surface. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  What  do  you  mean  by  a  small  basin  in  and 
around  Denver;  wherein  does  that  differ  from  the  general  area  of 
which  you  have  been  speaking? 

Mr.  Darton.  It  is  a  sandstone  basin  of  small  area.  It  has  a  small 
catchment  area,  and  some  of  the  water  is  free  to  escape,  so  that  it  does 
not  carry  a  large  volume  of  water,  whereas  this  Dakota  sandstone 
underlying,  as  a  continuous  sheet,  the  whole  of  the  vast  Plains  region, 
catches  and  holds  the  water  in  immense  volume  and  under  pressure 
given  by  the  elevated  source  to  the  west. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  Then  the  conditions  under  the  Central  Plains 
differ  from  the  local  conditions  at  Denver? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir.  I  mention  the  Denver  waters  simply  in  reply 
to  Mr.  Barham’s  question  as  to  whether  there  is  any  area  in  which 
the  artesian  water  is  giving  out.  This  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
broad  problem  of  the  Dakota  sandstone. 

Mr.  Barham.  That  is  what  I  am  getting  at.  In  the  interior  they 
have  not  found  any  diminution  of  the  inflow. 

Mr.  Darton.  They  have  in  some  instances  found  that  the  flow  was 
diminished,  but  that  has  been  because  the  wells  have  become  choked 
up  with  sand,  or  some  other  defect  in  the  well;  and  new  wells  in  the 
same  vicinity  alwa}7s  flow. 

Mr.  Reeder.  It  seems  to  me  the  flow  would  become  stronger  rather 
than  weaker,  with  the  sinking  of  wells,  for  the  reason  that  if  you 
diminish  the  surface  flow  to  the  east  there  would  be  a  tendency  to  clog 
up  the  sandstone  with  deposit.  If  you  have  the  outlets  shut  up  some¬ 
where,  the  water  would  rise  higher  in  the  wells.  Now  the  outlets  at 
the  eastern  end  are  being  kept  open  by  the  pressure  of  the  outflowing 
water.  This  permits  the  water  level  to  fall  to  a  lower  altitude  than 
that  which  it  would  have  if  the  openings  in  the  sandstone  at  the  eastern 
end  were  stopped  up.  The  water  goes  under  ground  at  an  altitude  of 
6,000  feet,  and  to  the  eastward;  where  the  Dakota  sandstone  outcrops 
to  the  surface  at  much  lower  altitudes  the  water  escapes  through 
innumerable  springs,  and  we  have  this  leakage. 

The  Chairman.  "Why  does  that  leakage  diminish  the  pressure  to 
the  west? 

Mr.  Reeder.  Because  the  water  flows  too  freely  to  sustain  the  pres¬ 
sure.  By  the  opening  of  wells  through  this  country  the  water  would 
have  a  greater  vent  by  openings  to  the  surface  which  would  tend  to 
maintain  its  flow  nearer  its  source,  and  would  not  this  make  less  pres¬ 
sure  at  the  lower  end? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  if  there  were  openings  to  the  west  there 


42 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


would  be  diminished  pressure  or  volume  of  outflow  along  the  eastern 
outcrops. 

The  Chairman.  And  the  more  pressure  you  have  here  along  the 
outflow  zone  the  more  likely  it  is  to  be  open  and  free  there? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir;  the  volume  of  outflow  would  naturally  be 
greater. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Do  you  know  what  the  source  of  the  water  is  in 
the  Dakota  sandstone?  Does  it  come  from  a  stream? 

Mr.  Darton.  No,  sir;  it  is  mainly  from  the  rainfall  in  the  outcrop 
zone  of  the  Dakota  sandstone,  which  is  8  or  10  or  15  miles  wide.  The 
surface  is  very  porous  and  the  rain  sinks  into  it.  It  is  also  well 
known  that  many  of  the  streams  crossing  the  outcrop  zone  lose  more 
or  less  of  their  water,  which  sinks  into  the  porous  sandstone. 

Mr.  Reeder.  I  want  to  get  at  these  points.  You  have  looked  into 
this  matter  thoroughly  enough  to  know  that  this  sandstone  underlies 
all  of  western  Kansas  and  Nebraska.  There  is  no  way  for  us  to  know 
whether  the  water  from  this  sandstone  can  be  brought  to  the  surface 
without  actually  trying  and  making  an  experiment.  Such  an  experi¬ 
ment  is  so  expensive  that  individuals  can  not  afford  it.  That  is  the 
point  I  wish  to  get  before  this  committee,  that  this  is  merely  a  propo¬ 
sition  to  make  such  experiments  as  will  show  whether  it  is  possible 
for  us  to  obtain  water  supplies  for  this  vast  territory  by  this  means. 
We  are  asking  in  bills  H.  R.  13242,  etc.,  $25,000  to  make  that 
experiment. 

Mr.  Darton.  The  test  wells  are  to  obtain  information  and  not  water. 

Mr.  Reeder.  It  is  to  obtain  information  and  not  water.  Our  peo¬ 
ple  will  obtain  the  water  if  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  it  is  there  for 
us  to  obtain.  That  is  my  only  point  in  the  matter. 

The  Chairman.  In  how  many  States  in  the  United  States  do  you 
think  artesian  wells  could  be  obtained  successfully? 

Mr.  Darton.  There  are  many.  We  know  of  numerous  artesian 
basins  scattered  widely  over  the  United  States.  But  I  have  not 
studied  in  detail  that  question  outside  of  the  region  of  the  Central 
Plains. 

Mr.  Reeder.  In  most  of  these  regions  that  you  speak  of,  has  not 
the  discovery  of  artesian  water  been  made  by  actual  borings  and  find¬ 
ing  the  water,  so  that  they  have  passed  the  stage  we  are  at  now? 

Mr.  Darton.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Reeder.  There  is  no  great  region  that  indicates  in  this  wajT 
that  the  water  is  there,  except  this  region,  which  lias  not  been  so 
tested? 

Mr.  Darton.  Not  so  far  as  I  know. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  Observing  Montana,  Idaho,  W yoming,  and  W ash- 
ington,  what  do  you  say  of  the  possibilities  of  artesian  basins  in  those 
States? 

Mr.  Darton.  There  are  artesian  basins  in  those  States,  but  they  are 
outside  of  the  area  assigned  to  me  for  investigation.  I  have  devoted 
myself  entirely  to  the  Central  Plains  region  for  the  last  three  or  four 
years,  and  feel  competent  to  speak  of  that  area  only. 

Mr.  Reeder.  Just  to  put  those  points  that  I  wanted  brought  up  to 
the  committee,  and  it  seems  to  me  that  it  is  as  plain  as  can  be,  and  I 
believe  that  is  all  the  committee  wants  to  consider — in  the  first  place, 
it  is  probable  that  these  conditions  exist;  second,  that  there  is  so 
great  an  expense  connected  with  making  these  experiments  that  you 
can  not  expect  individuals  to  do  it  for  themselves. 

Mr.  King.  What  is  the  sum  carried  in  the  appropriation  bills  for 
such  investigations? 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


43 


STATEMENT  OF  FREDERICK  H.  NEWELL,  HYDROGRAPHER,  UNITED 

STATES  GEOLOGICAL  SURVEY. 

Mr.  Newell.  The  amount  for  investigation  of  water  resources  cov¬ 
ered  by  an  item  in  the  sundry  civil  bill  has  gradually  increased  from 
$12,500,  in  1895,  to  $50,000,  and  last  year  it  was  put  at  $100,000.  That 
includes  investigation  all  over  the  United  States,  with  regard  to  water 
in  streams  or  under  ground. 

The  Chairman.  Do  you  know  how  much  is  carried  in  the  various 
bills  for  the  Department  of  Agriculture  and  the  Geological  Survey  in 
the  direction  of  experiments  in  regard  to  irrigation? 

Mr.  Newell.  The  Appropriations  Committee  of  the  House  is  inter¬ 
ested  in  that  question,  and  by  instructions  from  that  committee  the 
various  items  of  appropriation  made  during  the  last  twelve  years  have 
been  assembled,  including  various  lines  relating  to  irrigation.  These 
include  the  construction  of  ditches  on  Indian  reservations,  the  pur¬ 
chase  of  tools,  implements,  water  rights,  etc.,  as  well  as  investigations 
of  various  kinds  in  all  parts  of  the  United  States.  An  abstract  of 
these  laws  and  appropriation  acts  is  presented  herewith. 

IRRIGATION  SURVEYS  AND  INVESTIGATIONS  BY  THE  UNITED  STATES 

GEOLOGICAL  SURVEY. 

LEGISLATION. 

The  United  States  Geological  Survey  is  concerned  with  the  water 
resources  of  the  country  primarily  through  what  is  known  as  the 
organic  law  contained  in  the  act  of  Congress  of  March  3,  1879.  To  the 
paragraph  creating  the  office  of  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey  the 
following  proviso  was  attached: 

*  *  *  That  this  officer  shall  have  the  direction  of  the  Geological  Survey, 
and  the  classification  of  the  public  lands  and  examination  of  the  geological  struc¬ 
ture,  mineral  resources,  and  products  of  the  national  domain  and  that  the  Director 
and  members  of  the  Geological  Survey  shall  have  no  personal  or  private  interests 
in  the  lands  or  mineral  wealth  of  the  region  under  survey,  and  shall  execute  no 
surveys  or  examinations  for  private  parties  or  corporations.  (Approved  March 
3,  1879.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  20,  p.  394.) 

The  first  requisite  in  the  “classification  of  the  public  lands  and  the 
examination  of  the  geological  structure,  mineral  resources,  and  prod¬ 
ucts  of  the  national  domain,”  is  a  topographic  map  for  guidance  and 
for  exhibiting  the  results.  Since  the  organization  of  the  Survey,  there¬ 
fore,  a  large  part  of  its  energies  has  been  concentrated  on  the  prepa¬ 
ration  of  such  a  map,  showing  all  elevations  by  means  of  contours, 
also  the  location  of  streams,  towns,  roads,  railroads,  and  canals  for 
irrigation  or  transportation,  isolated  houses,  and  boundaries  of  States, 
counties,  and  towns.  This  map  exhibits  the  drainage  area  of  streams, 
the  relative  elevations  of  catchment  basins  and  irrigable  lands,  the 
topographic  features  favorable  to  water  conservation,  the  Land  Office 
lines,  the  slopes  of  valle}rs,  and  many  other  details  of  importance  to  the 
development  of  water  powers  and  of  irrigation  or  the  reclamation  of 
the  arid  lands. 

In  1887  the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey  was  called  upon  by 
Congress  to  consider  the  question  of  Federal  recognition  of  the  irri¬ 
gation  subject.  A  resolution  was  passed  requiring  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior,  by  means  of  the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey,  to 
make  an  investigation  of  that  portion  of  the  arid  region  of  the  United 


44 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


States  where  agriculture  is  carried  on  by  means  of  irrigation.  The 
resolution  reads  as  follows: 

Whereas  a  large  portion  of  the  unoccupied  public  lands  of  the  United  States 
is  located  within  what  is  known  as  the  arid  region,  and  now  utilized  only  for 
grazing  purposes,  but  much  of  which,  by  means  of  irrigation,  may  be  rendered 
as  fertile  and  productive  as  any  land  in  the  world,  capable  of  supporting  a  large 
population,  thereby  adding  to  the  national  wealth  and  prosperity: 

Whereas  all  the  water  flowing  during  the  summer  months  in  many  of  the 
streams  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  upon  which  chiefly  the  husbandman  of  the 
plains  and  the  mountain  valleys  chiefly  depends  for  moisture  for  his  crops,  has 
been  appropriated  and  is  used  for  the  irrigation  of  lands  contiguous  thereto, 
whereby  a  comparatively  small  area  has  been  reclaimed;  and 

Whereas  there  are  many  natural  depressions  near  the  sources  and  along  the 
courses  of  these  streams  which  may  be  converted  into  reservoirs  for  the  storage 
of  the  surplus  water  which  during  the  winter  and  spring  seasons  flows  through 
the  streams;  from  which  reservoirs  the  water  there  stored  can  be  drawn  and 
conducted  through  properly  constructed  canals,  at  the  proper  season,  thus  bring¬ 
ing  large  areas  of  land  into  cultivation,  and  making  desirable  much  of  the  public 
land  for  which  there  is  now  no  demand;  therefore  be  it 

Resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of 
America  in  Congress  assembled ,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  by  means  of 
the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey,  be,  and  he  is  hereby,  directed  to  make  an 
examination  of  that  portion  of  the  arid  regions  of  the  United  States  where  agri¬ 
culture  is  carried  on  by  means  of  irrigation,  as  to  the  natural  advantages  for  the 
storage  of  water  for  irrigating  purposes  with  the  practicability  of  constructing 
reservoirs,  together  with  the  capacity  of  the  streams  and  the  cost  of  construction 
and  capacity  of  reservoirs,  and  such  other  facts  as  bear  on  the  question  of  storage 
of  water  for  irrigating  purposes;  and  that  he  be  further  directed  to  report  to  Con¬ 
gress  as  soon  as  practicable  the  result  of  such  investigation.  (Approved  March 
20,  188S.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  25,  pp.  618,  619.) 

This  was  followed  by  the  passage  of  an  act  containing  an  appropria¬ 
tion  of  $100,000  for  the  purpose  of  investigating  the  extent  to  which 
the  arid  region  of  the  United  States  can  be  redeemed  by  irrigation. 
This  act  is  as  follows : 

For  the  purpose  of  investigating  the  extent  to  which  the  arid  region  of  the 
United  States  can  be  redeemed  by  irrigation,  and  the  segregation  of  the  irrigable 
lands  in  such  arid  region,  and  for  the  selection  of  sites  for  reservoirs  and  other 
hydraulic  works  necessary  for  the  storage  and  utilizat’on  of  water  for  irrigation 
and  the  prevention  of  floods  and  overflows,  and  to  make  the  necessary  maps,  includ¬ 
ing  the  pay  of  employees  in  field  and  in  office,  the  cost  of  all  instruments,  appara¬ 
tus,  and  materials,  and  all  other  necessary  expenses  connected  therewith,  the  work 
to  be  peformed  by  the  Geological  Survey,  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior,  the  sum  of  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  or  so  much  thereof  as  may 
be  necessary.  And  the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey,  under  the  supervision 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  shall  make  a  report  to  Congress  on  the  first  Monday 
in  December  of  each  year,  showing  in  detail  how  the  said  money  has  been  expended, 
the  amount  used  for  actual  survey  and  engineer  work  in  the  field  in  locating  sites 
for  reservoirs,  and  an  itemized  account  of  the  expenditure  under  this  appropria¬ 
tion.  And  all  the  lands  which  may  hereafter  be  designated  or  selected  by  such 
United  States  surveys  for  sites  for  reservoirs,  ditches,  or  canals  for  irrigation  pur¬ 
poses  and  all  the  lands  made  susceptible  of  irrigation  by  such  reservoirs,  ditches, 
or  canals  are  from  this  time  henceforth  hereby  reserved  from  sale  as  the  property 
of  the  United  States,  and  shall  not  be  subject  after  the  passage  of  this  act  to  entry, 
settlement,  or  occupation  until  further  provided  by  law: 

Provided ,  That  the  President  may  at  any  time  in  his  discretion  by  proclamation 
open  any  portion  or  all  of  the  lands  reserved  by  this  provision  to  settlement  under 
the  homestead  laws.  (Approved  October  2,  1888.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  25,  pp.  526,  527.) 

In  the  following  year  $250,000  was  appropriated  for  continuing  the 
work.  (Approved  March  2,  1889.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  25,  p.  960.) 

A  portion  of  the  law  passed  October  2,  1888,  was  repealed  by  the 
following  provision  in  the  act  approved  August  30,  1890  (Stat.  L., 
vol.  26,  p.  391),  and  no  appropriation  was  made  for  irrigation  work  as 
such : 

For  topographic  surveys  in  various  portions  of  the  United  States,  three  hun¬ 
dred  and  twenty-five  thousand  dollars,  one-half  of  which  sum  shall  be  expended 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


45 


west  of  the  one  hundredth  meridian;  and  so  much  of  the  act  of  October  second, 
eighteen  hundred  and  eighty-eight,  entitled  “An  act  making  appropriations  for 
sundry  civil  expenses  of  the  Government  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  thirtieth, 
eighteen  hundred  and  eighty-nine,  and  for  other  purposes,”  as  provides  for  the 
withdrawal  of  the  public  lands  from  entry,  occupation,  and  settlement,  is  hereby 
repealed,  and  all  entries  made  or  claims  initiated  in  good  faith  and  valid  but  for 
said  act,  shall  be  recognized  and  may  be  perfected  in  the  same  manner  as  if  said 
law  had  not  been  enacted,  except  that  reservoir  sites  heretofore  located  or  selected 
shall  remain  segregated  and  reserved  from  entry  or  settlement  as  provided  by 
said  act,  until  otherwise  provided  by  law,  and  reservoir  sites  hereafter  located  or 
selected  on  public  lands  shall  in  like  manner  be  reserved  from  the  date  of  the  loca¬ 
tion  or  selection  thereof. 

No  person  who  shall  after  the  passage  of  this  act,  enter  upon  any  of  the  public 
lands  with  a  view  to  occupation,  entry  or  settlement  under  any  of  the  land  laws 
shall  be  permitted  to  acquire  title  to  more  than  three  hundred  and  twenty  acres 
in  the  aggregate,  under  all  of  said  laws,  but  this  limitation  shall  not  operate  to 
curtail  the  right  of  any  person  who  has  heretofore  made  entry  or  settlement  on 
the  public  lands,  or  whose  occupation,  entry  or  settlement  is  validated  by  this 
act:  Provided,  That  in  all  patents  for  lands  hereafter  taken  up  under  any  of  the 
land  laws  of  the  United  States  or  on  entries  or  claims  validated  by  this  act  west 
of  the  one  hundredth  meridian,  it  shall  be  expressed  that  there  is  reserved  from 
the  lands  in  said  patent  described,  a  right  of  way  thereon  for  ditches  and  canals 
constructed  by  the  authority  of  the  United  States.  (Approved  August  30,  1890. 
Stat.  L.,  vol.  26,  p.  391.) 

Under  this  law  the  Survey  selected  and  mapped  a  large  number  of 
reservoir  sites,  which  have  been  noted  on  the  records  of  the  General 
Land  Office,  and  are  now  reserved  from  entry  or  settlement.  Descrip¬ 
tions  of  these  sites  may  be  found  in  the  Tenth,  Eleventh,  Twelfth, 
and  Thirteenth  Annual  Reports  of  the  Geological  Survey. 

From  the  above  cited  paragraphs  it  appears  that  the  portion  of  the 
original  law  approved  October  2,  1888,  which  affected  the  withdrawal 
of  the  public  lands  from  entry,  occupation,  and  settlement  was 
repealed,  but  that  the  remaining  portions  of  the  law  were  unaffected 
by  the  act  of  repeal,  and  that  there  is  still  on  the  statute  books 
authority  for  making  an  examination  of  the  arid  region  of  the  United 
States,  for  ascertaining  the  capacity  of  the  streams,  and  “for  the 
selection  of  sites  for  reservoirs  and  other  hydraulic  works  necessary 
for  the  storage  and  utilization  of  water  for  irrigation  and  the  preven¬ 
tion  of  floods  and  overflows,  and  to  make  the  necessary  maps.” 

In  the  repealing  act  it  was  specifically  provided  that  the  reservoir 
sites  shall  remain  segregated  for  such  use,  and  in  a  law  entitled  4  4 An 
act  to  repeal  timber-culture  laws,  and  for  other  purposes,”  approved 
March  3,  1891,  it  is  provided: 

That  reservoir  sites  located  or  selected  and  to  be  located  and  selected  under  the 
provisions  of  “An  act  making  appropriations  for  sundry  civil  expenses  of  the 
Government  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  thirtieth,  eighteen  hundred  and  eighty- 
nine,  and  for  other  purposes,”  and  amendments  thereto,  shall  be  restricted  to  and 
shall  contain  only  so  much  land  as  is  actually  necessary  for  the  construction  and 
maintenance  of  reservoirs;  excluding  so  far  as  practicable  lands  occupied  by 
actual  settlers  at  the  date  of  the  location  of  said  reservoirs.  (Stat.  L.,  vol.  26, 

p.  1101.) 

Appropriation  for  irrigation  surveys  ( Powell ),  including  topographic  mapping. 


Year. 

Item. 

Amount. 

Statutes  at 
Large. 

1889.... 

Storage  reservoir  and  topographic  surveys . 

$100, 000 

Vol.  25.  p.  526. 

1890.... 

Investigation  of  arid  region  and  topographic  surveys . . 

250,000 

Vol.  25,  p.  960. 

Under  the  various  laws  above  cited,  systematic  measurements  of 
the  streams  of  the  arid  regions  were  begun  by  the  Division  of  Hydrog¬ 
raphy,  and  were  continued  after  August  30,  1890,  as  incidental  to  the 


46 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


topographic  surveys  and  selection  of  reservoir  sites.  By  act  of 
August  18,  1894,  the  following  specific  appropriation  was  made  for 
this  class  of  work : 

For  gauging  the  streams  and  determining  the  water  supply  of  the  United 
States,  including  the  investigation  of  underground  currents  and  artesian  wells  in 
arid  and  semiarid  sections,  twelve  thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  (Approved 
August  18,  1894.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  28,  p.  898.) 

A  further  appropriation  by  act  approved  March  2,  1895  (Stat.  L., 
vol.  28,  p.  940),  made  available  the  sum  of  $20,000  for  the  fiscal  year 
1895-96,  and  a  later  act  was  worded  as  follows: 

f  For  gauging  the  streams  and  determining  the  water  supply  of  the  United 
States,  including  the  investigation  of  underground  currents  and  artesian  wells  in 
arid  and  semiarid  sections,  and  the  preparation  of  reports  upon  the  best  methods 
of  utilizing  the  water  resources  of  said  sections,  fifty  thousand  dollars.  (Approved 
June  11,  1896.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  29,  d.  436.) 

Provision  has  been  made  for  printing  the  reports  for  popular  dis¬ 
tribution  by  the  following  clause  in  the  act  last  named : 

Provided ,  That  hereafter  the  reports  of  the  Geological  Survey  in  relation  to  the 
gauging  of  streams  and  to  the  methods  of  utilizing  the  water  resources  may  be 
printed  in  octavo  form,  not  to  exceed  100  pages  in  length  and  5,000  copies  in  num¬ 
ber;  1,000  copies  of  which  shall  be  for  the  official  use  of  the  Geological  Survey, 
1,500  copies  shall  be  delivered  to  the  Senate,  and  2,500  copies  shall  be  delivered  to 
the  House  of  Representatives,  for  distribution.  (Approved  June  11,  1896.  Stat. 
L.,  vol.  29,  p.  453.) 

The  current  appropriation  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1901, 
$100,000,  is  similar  to  the  above,  with  a  slight  change  in  the  wording, 
as  follows : 

For  gauging  the  streams  and  determining  the  water  supply  of  the  United 
States,  and  for  the  investigation  of  underground  currents  and  artesian  wells  in 
arid  and  semiarid  sections,  and  the  preparation  of  reports  upon  the  best  methods 
of  utilizing  the  water  resources  of  said  sections,  one  hundred  thousand  dollars. 
(Approved  June  6,  1900.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  31,  p.  617.) 

The  amounts  appropriated  for  gauging  streams,  etc. ,  in  the  sundry 
civil  acts  are  as  follows : 


Summary  of  appropriations  for  gauging  streams  {Walcott). 


Year. 


1895 

1896 

1896 

1897 

1898 

1899 

1900 

1900 

1901 


Item. 

Amount. 

Approved. 

Statute  at 
Large. 

Gauging  streams . 

$12, 500 

Aug. 

18, 1894 

Vol.  28,  p. 

398 

Gauging  streams  - . . 

20,000 

Mar. 

2,  1895 

Vol.  28,  p. 

940 

Gauging  streams  (agricultural) . 

4, 500 

Apr. 

14, 1896 

Vol.  29,  p. 

104 

Gauging  streams . 

50, 000 

June 

11, 1896 

Vol.  29,  p. 

436 

Gauging  streams . . . 

50, 000 

June 

4, 1897 

Vol.  30,  p. 

37 

Gauging  streams . . _ . 

50, 000 

July 

1,1898 

Vol.  30,  p. 

623 

Gauging  streams . 

50, 000 

Mar. 

3, 1899 

Vol.  30,  p. 

1099 

Gauging  streams  (deficiency) . 

Gauging  streams . 

20, 000 

Mar. 

30, 1900 

Vol.  31,  p. 

57 

100, 000 

June 

6, 1900 

Vol.  31,  p. 

617 

Total . . . 

357, 000 

CONSTRUCTING  IRRIGATING  DITCHES,  ETC.,  UNDER  INDIAN  OFFICE. 

LEGISLATION. 

The  Office  of  Indian  Affairs,  having  in  charge  the  execution  of  vari¬ 
ous  acts  of  Congress  relative  to  the  Indians,  has,  as  incidental  to  the 
support  of  various  tribes  located  within  the  arid  region,  the  construe- 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.  47 

tion  and  maintenance  of  irrigation  canals,  the  sinking  of  artesian 
wells,  and  the  providing  of  other  means  of  water  supply. 

For  the  construction,  purchase,  and  use  of  irrigating  machinery  and  appliances 
in  Arizona,  Montana,  and  Nevada  for  the  uses  of  Indian  reservations,  in  the  dis¬ 
cretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  subject  to  his  control,  thirty  thousand 
dollars,  to  be  immediately  available.  (Approved  March  3, 1891.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  26, 
p.  1011.) 

The  most  important  irrigation  system  under  construction  by  the 
Indian  Office  is  that  upon  the  Crow  Indian  Reservation  in  Montana. 
This  results  from  the  agreement  concluded  with  the  Crow  Indians 
December  8,  1890,  and  ratified  by  the  act  of  March  3,  1891,  appropri¬ 
ating  $200,000.  By  a  supplemental  agreement  concluded  August  27, 
1892,  a  further  sum  of  $200,000  was  added  to  the  irrigation  fund,  with 
the  provision  that  not  exceeding  $100,000  might  be  used  in  any  one 
year,  and  if  a  less  sum  were  expended  in  any  one  year  the  difference 
might  thereafter  be  expended  in  addition  to  the  $100,000  available  for 
that  year. 

There  is  hereby  appropriated  and  set  apart  two  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  be 
expended  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  in  the  building  of 
dams,  canals,  ditches,  and  laterals  for  the  purposes  of  irrigation  in  the  valleys  of 
the  Big  Horn  and  the  Little  Big  Horn  rivers,  and  on  Pryor  Creek  and  such  other 
streams  as  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may  deem  proper;  Provided ,  That  not  to 
exceed  fifty  thousand  dollars  shall  be  expended  annually  in  performing  this  work: 
And  provided  further ,  That  the  superintendent  in  charge  of  said  works  shall,  in 
the  employment  of  laborers,  be  required  to  give  preference  to  such  Indians  of  the 
Crow  tribe  as  are  competent  and  willing  to  work  at  the  average  wages  paid  to 
common  laborers  for  the  same  kind  of  work,  and  the  labor  so  employed  shall  be 
paid  in  cash. 

That  the  sum  of  seventy-five  thousand  dollars  is  hereby  appropriated  and  set 
apart  as  an  irrigating  fund,  to  be  expended  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Interior  for  the  maintenance  and  management  of  the  system  of  irrigation 
provided  for  in  this  agreement.  (Stat.  L.,  vol.  26,  p.  1040.) 

Irrigation  Indian  reservations:  For  the  construction,  purchase,  and  use  of  irri¬ 
gating  machinery  and  appliances  on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  discretion  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  subject  to  his  control,  forty  thousand  dollars. 
(Approved  July  13,  1892.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  27,  p.  137.) 

A  number  of  annual  appropriations  have  been  made  for  the  purpose 
of  constructing  irrigating  ditches,  for  the  purchase  of  machinery,  and 
for  sinking  artesian  wells,  as  well  as  occasional  appropriations  for 
supplying  water  on  various  Indian  reservations.  The  following  are 
the  most  important  of  these  acts : 

For  the  construction  of  irrigating  ditches  and  the  development  of  a  water  sup¬ 
ply  for  agricultural,  stock,  and  domestic  purposes  on  the  Navajo  Indian  Reserva¬ 
tion,  forty  thousand  dollars,  to  be  expended  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior.  (Approved  March  3,  1893.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  27,  pp.  627,628.) 

In  addition  to  this  sum  of  $40,000,  there  was  a  balance  of  about 
$20,000  remaining  from  previous  appropriations,  making  a  total  of 
$60,000,  regarded  as  available  for  this  purpose. 

For  the  construction,  purchase,  and  use  of  irrigating  machinery  and  appliances 
on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  forty 
thousand  dollars:  Provided ,  That  of  this  sum  a  sufficient  amount  may  be  used  to 
sink  one  artesian  well  at  each  of  the  three  following  places,  namely:  Rosebud  Res¬ 
ervation,  Standing  Rock  Reservation,  and  Pine  Ridge  Reservation,  in  South 
Dakota,  neither  of  said  wells  to  cost  more  than  five  thousand  dollars.  (Approved, 
March  3,  1893.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  27,  p.  631.) 

For  the  construction,  purchase,  and  use  of  irrigating  machinery  and  appliances 
on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  aud  sub¬ 
ject  to  his  control,  thirty  thousand  dollars. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  directed  to  contract  with  responsible  parties  for 
the  construction  of  irrigating  canals  and  the  purchase  or  securing  of  water  sup¬ 
ply  on  the  Fort  Hall  Indian  Reservation,  in  the  State  of  Idaho,  for  the  purpose  of 


48 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


irrigating  the  lands  of  said  reservation:  Provided,  That  the  expense  of  construct¬ 
ing  said  canals  and  the  purchase  or  securing  of  water  supply  shall  be  paid  out  of 
moneys  belonging  to  the  said  Fort  Hall  Indians  nowin  the  Treasury  of  the  United 
States  and  subject  to  the  disposition  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  for  the  bene¬ 
fit  of  said  Indians.  (Approved,  August  15,  1894.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  28,  p.  805.) 

For  the  construction,  purchase,  and  use  of  irrigating  machinery  and  appliances 
on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  sub¬ 
ject  to  his  control,  thirty  thousand  dollars.  (Approved,  March  2.  1895.  Stat.  L., 
vol.  28,  p.  900.) 

For  the  construction,  purchase,  and  use  of  irrigating  tools  and  appliances  on 
Indian  reservations,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  subject 
to  his  control,  thirty  thousand  dollars,  and  of  this  amount  not  exceeding  two 
thousand  seven  hundred  dollars  may  be  used  for  thfe  temporary  employment  of 
persons  of  practical  experience  in  irrigation  work  at  a  compensation  not  to  exceed 
seventy-fiye  dollars  per  month,  each,  and  not  exceeding  one  thousand  five  hundred 
dollars  for  necessary  traveling  and  incidental  expenses  of  such  persons.  (Approved, 
June  10,  1896.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  29,  p.  341.) 

To  enable  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  put  down  an  artesian  well  or  wells  at 
or  near  Lake  Andes,  on  the  Yankton  Indian  Reservation,  South  Dakota,  at  such 
place  or  places  as  he  may  determine,  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  said  Indians 
with  water  for  domestic  purposes,  for  stock,  and  for  irrigation  purposes,  five 
thousand  dollars.  (Approved,  June  10,  1896.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  29,  p.  343.) 

For  construction  of  ditches  and  reservoirs,  purchase  and  use  of  irrigating  tools 
and  appliances  on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  and  subject  to  his  control,  thirty  thousand  dollars:  and  of  this  amount 
not  exceeding  two  thousand  seven  hundred  dollars  may  be  used  for  the  temporary 
employment  of  persons  of  practical  experience  in  irrigation  work,  at  a  compensa¬ 
tion  not  to  exceed  one  hundred  dollars  per  month  each,  and  not  exceeding  one 
thousand  five  hundred  dollars  for  necessary  traveling  and  incidental  expenses  of 
such  persons.  (Approved,  June  7,  1897.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  p.  85.) 

For  construction  of  ditches  and  reservoirs,  purchase  and  use  of  irrigating  tools 
and  appliances,  and  purchase  of  water  rights  in  Indian  reservations,  in  the  discre¬ 
tion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  subject  to  his  control,  forty  thousand  dol¬ 
lars.  (Approved,  July  1,  1898.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  p.  591.) 

The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  make  investigation  as  to  the  practicability  of 
providing  a  water  supply  for  irrigation  purposes,  to  be  used  on  a  portion  of  the 
reservation  of  the  Southern  Utes  in  Colorado,  and  he  is  authorized,  in  his  discre¬ 
tion,  to  contract  for,  and  to  expend  from  the  funds  of  said  Southern  Utes  in  the 
purchase  of,  perpetual  water  rights  sufficient  to  irrigate  not  exceeding  ten  thou¬ 
sand  acres  on  the  western  part  of  the  Southern  Ute  Reservation,  and  for  annual 
charges  for  maintenance  of  such  water  thereon,  such  amount  and  upon  such  terms 
and  conditions  as  to  him  may  seem  just  and  reasonable,  not  exceeding  one  hun¬ 
dred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  for  the  purchase  of  such  perpetual  water  rights, 
and  not  exceeding  a  maximum  of  fifty  cents  per  acre  for  the  maintenance  of  water 
upon  land  irrigated,  provided  that  after  such  an  investigation  he  shall  find  all  the 
essential  conditions  relative  to  the  water  supply  and  to  the  perpetuity  of  its  avail¬ 
ability  for  use  upon  said  lands,  such  as  in  his  judgment  will  justify  a  contract  for 
its  perpetual  U3e:  Provided,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  upon  making  all 
such  contracts,  shall  require  from  the  person  or  persons  entering  into  such  con¬ 
tracts  a  bond  of  indemnity,  to  be  approved  by  him,  for  the  faithful  and  continu¬ 
ous  execution  of  such  contract  as  provided  therein.  (Approved,  July  1,  1898. 
Stat.  L.,  vol.  30',  p.  593.) 

For  ascertaining  the  depth  of  the  bed  rock  at  a  place  on  the  Gila  River  in  Gila 
County,  Arizona,  known  as  The  Buttes,  and  particularly  described  in  Senate  Doc¬ 
ument  Numbered  Twenty-seven,  Fifty-fourth  Congress,  second  session,  and  for 
ascertaining  the  feasibility,  and  estimating  in  detail  the  cost,  of  the  construction 
of  a  dam  across  the  river  at  that  point  for  purpose  of  irrigating  the  Sacaton  Res¬ 
ervation,  and  for  ascertaining  the  average  daily  flow  of  water  in  the  river  at  that 
point,  twenty  thousand  dollars,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary,  the  same 
to  be  expended  by  the  director  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey,  under  the 
direction  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior:  Provided ,  That  nothing  herein  shall  be 
construed  as  in  any  way  committing  the  United  States  to  the  construction  of  said 
dam.  And  said  director  shall  also  ascertain  and  report  upon  the  feasibility  and 
cost  of  the  Queen  Creek  project  mentioned  in  said  Senate  document.  (Approved, 
July  1,  1898.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  p.  594.) 

For  construction  of  ditches  and  reservoirs,  purchase  and  use  of  irrigating  tools 
and  appliances,  and  purchase  of  water  rights  on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  dis¬ 
cretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  subject  to  his  control,  forty  thousand 
dollars.  (Approved,  March  1, 1899.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  pp.  940,  941.) 


ARID  LANDS  OR  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


49 


That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  make  investigation  as  to  the  practica¬ 
bility  of  providing  a  water  supply  for  irrigation  purposes,  to  be  used  on  a  portion 
of  the  reservation  of  the  Southern  Utes  in  Colorado,  and  he  is  authorized,  in  his 
discretion,  to  contract  for,  and  to  expend  from  the  funds  of  said  Southern  Utes  in 
the  purchase  of,  perpetual  water  rights  sufficient  to  irrigate  not  exceeding  ten 
thousand  acres  on  the  western  part  of  the  Southern  Ute  Reservation,  and  for 
annual  charges  for  maintenance  of  such  water  thereon,  such  amount  and  upon 
such  terms  and  conditions  as  to  him  may  seem  just  and  reasonable,  not  exceeding 
one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  for  the  purchase  of  such  perpetual  water 
rights,  and  not  exceeding  a  maximum  of  fifty  cents  per  acre  per  annum  for  the 
maintenance  of  water  upon  the  land  to  be  irrigated:  Provided ,  That  after  such 
an  investigation  he  shall  find  all  the  essential  conditions  relative  to  the  water  sup¬ 
ply  and  to  the  perpetuity  of  its  availability  for  use  upon  said  lands,  such  as  in  his 
judgment  will  justify  a  contract  for  its  perpetual  use:  Provided ,  That  the  Secre¬ 
tary  of  the  Interior,  upon  making  all  such  contracts,  shall  require  from  the  per¬ 
son  or  persons  entering  upon  such  contract,  a  bond  of  indemnity,  to  be  approved 
by  him,  for  the  faithful  and  continuous  execution  of  such  contract  as  provided 
therein.”  (Approved,  March  1,  1899.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  p.  941.) 

For  construction  of  ditches  and  reservoirs,  purchase  and  use  of  irrigating  tools 
and  appliances,  and  purchase  of  water  rights,  on  Indian  reservations,  in  the  dis¬ 
cretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  subject  to  his  control,  fifty  thousand 
dollars:  Provided ,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may  employ  superintendents 
of  irrigation,  who  shall  be  skilled  irrigating  engineers,  not  to  exceed  two.  as  in  his 
judgment  may  be  necessary  to  secure  the  construction  of  ditches  and  other  irri¬ 
gation  works  in  a  substantial  and  workmanlike  manner:  and  also  one  clerk  in  the 
Office  of  Indian  Affairs,  at  a  salary  of  one  thousand  dollars  per  annum.  (Approved, 
May  31,  1900.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  31,  p.  239.) 

The  principal  appropriations  for  the  construction  of  irrigation 
ditches,  etc.,  under  the  Office  of  Indian  Affairs  are  as  follows: 


Principal  appropriations  for  construction  of  irrigation  ditches,  etc. ,  under  Office 

of  Indian  Affairs. 


Year 

end¬ 

ing- 

Item. 

Amount. 

Date  ap¬ 
proved. 

Statutes  at 
Large. 

1892 

Irrigating  machinery . . . - _ 

$30, 000 

Mar.  3,1891 
-  .do . . 

Vol.  26,  p. 

1011 

1892 

Crow  Indians . - . - 

275, 000 

Vol.  26,  p. 
Vol.  27,  p. 
Vol.  27,  p. 
Vol.  27,  p. 
Vol  28,  p. 
Vol.  28,  p. 

1040 

1893 

Irrigating  machinery . . . . . . 

40,000 
40, 000 
40,000 
30,000 

July  13, 1892 
Mar.  3,1893 
_ do  . 

137 

1894 

Navajo  Indians . . . . . 

627 

1894 

Irrigation  and  artesian  wells . 

631 

1895 

Irrigation  machinery,  etc . - . 

Aug.  15, 1894 

305 

1895 

Fort  Hull  Canal  (cost  not  stated) . 

305 

1896 

Irrigation,  etc . . . . . . . 

30,000 
30, 000 
5,000 
30, 000 
40,000 

Mar.  2,1895 

Vol.  28,  p. 
Vol.  29,  p. 
Vol.  29,  p. 

900 

1897 

. do . . . . . . 

June  19,1896 
_ do . . 

341 

1897 

Artesian  well,  South  Dakota . 

343 

189« 

Construction  of  ditches,  etc . 

June  7,1897 
July  1,1898 
. do . 

Vol.  30,  p. 

85 

1899 

_ do  . . 

Vol.  30,  p. 
Vol.  30,  p. 
Vol.  30,  p. 
Vol.  30,  p. 
Vol.  30,  p. 
Vol.  31,  p. 

591 

1899 

Southern  Ute  ($150,000) . 

593 

1899 

Gila  River,  Buttes  dam . . . . . 

20, 000 
40,000 

_ do . . 

594 

1900 

Construction  of  ditches,  etc . 

Mar.  1,1899 
. do  - . 

940 

1900 

Southern  Utes  ($150,000) _ _ _ _ 

941 

1901 

Construction  of  ditches,  etc . . . 

50,000 

May  31,1900 

239 

Total . . 

700,000 

IRRIGATION  INVESTIGATIONS  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE. 

Office  of  Irrigation  Inquiry . — This  office  was  created  in  1890,  and 
continued,  by  various  acts  of  Congress,  until  1892.  These  acts  are 
as  follows: 

Location  for  artesian  wells:  To  authorize  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  make 
such  preliminary  investigation  of  an  engineering  and  other  character  as  will,  so 
far  as  practicable,  determine  the  proper  location  for  artesian  wells  for  irrigation 
purposes  within  the  area  west  of  the  ninety-seventh  meridian  and  east  of  the  foot¬ 
hills  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  twenty  thousand  dollars;  and  a  report  of  all  opera¬ 
tions  and  expenditures  hereunder  shall  be  made  to  Congress  immediately  after 
July  first,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety:  Provided ,  That  no  part  of  said  amount 

11196—01 - 4 


50 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


shall  be  expended  in  sinking  wells  or  the  construction  of  irrigation  works,  and  the 
work  done  under  this  appropriation  shall  be  completed  and  a  report  of  the  same 
made  within  the  appropriation,  and  nothing  herein  shall  commit  the  Government 
to  any  plan  of  irrigation  or  the  construction  of  works  therefor.  (Approved  April 
4,  1890.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  26,  p.  42.) 

Irrigation  investigations:  To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  continue  to 
completion  his  investigations  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  extent  and  avail¬ 
ability  for  irrigation  of  the  underflow  and  artesian  waters  within  the  region 
between  the  ninety-seventh  degree  of  longitude  and  the  eastern  foothills  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains,  and  to  collect  and  publish  information  as  to  the  best  methods 
of  cultivating  the  soil  by  irrigation,  forty  thousand  dollars:  Provided,  That  no 
part  of  said  sum  shall  be  expended  under  unless  the  entire  investigation,  collec¬ 
tion,  and  publication  contemplated  herein,  including  the  report  thereon,  can  be 
fully  and  finally  completed  and  finished  before  July  first,  eighteen  hundred  and 
ninety-one,  without  any  additional  expense,  cost,  or  charge  being  incurred. 
(Approved  September  30,  1890.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  26,  p.  526.) 

Contingent  expenses:  The  time  for  the  final  completion  of  the  report  of  the 
extent  and  availability  for  irrigation  by  the  underflow  and  artesian  water  within 
the  region  between  the  ninety-seventh  degree  of  longitude  and  the  eastern  foot¬ 
hills  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  the  correction  and  publication  of  information 
as  to  the  best  method  of  cultivating  the  soil  by  irrigation,  limited  to  the  first  of 
July,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-one,  by  the  act  of  September  thirtieth,  eighteen 
hundred  and  ninety,  is  hereby  extended  to  the  first  day  of  January,  eighteen 
hundred  and  ninety-two;  and  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dollars  is  hereby  appro¬ 
priated  to  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  correct  and  publish  information 
as  to  the  best  methods  of  cultivating  the  soil  by  irrigation.  (Approved  March  3, 
1891.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  26,  p.  1052.) 

The  balance  of  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dollars,  appropriated  by  act  of  March 
third,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-one,  to  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to 
collect  and  publish  information  as  to  the  best  methods  of  cultivating  the  soil  by 
irrigation,  remaining  unexpended  on  January  first,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety- 
two,  is  hereby  reappropriated  and  made  available  for  said  purposes  until  the 
fifteenth  day  of  April  next,  and  out  of  said  amount  the  disbursing  officer  of  the 
Department  of  Agriculture  shall  be  reimbursed  in  the  sum  of  nine  hundred  and 
eighteen  dollars  and  seventy-six  cents  by  him  paid  out  since  January  first,  eighteen 
hundred  and,  ninety-two,  as  salaries  and  expenses  of  the  division  of  said  Depart¬ 
ment  having  charge  of  the  irrigation  inquiry,  and  from  said  amount  there  shall 
also  be  paid  all  unpaid  balances  of  compensation  due  persons  heretofore  employed 
in  said  division  for  services  rendered  and  not  yet  paid  for,  said  report  and  all  pro¬ 
ceedings  hereunder  to  be  completed  by  the  fifteenth  day  of  April.  (Approved 
March  18,  1892.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  27,  p.  10.) 

The  Office  of  Irrigation  Inquiry  was  reorganized,  in  1892,  and  annual 
appropriations  have  been  made  as  follows: 

To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  collect  information  as  to  the  best 
modes  of  agriculture  by  irrigation,  six  thousand  dollars.  (Approved  July  5, 1892. 
Stat.  L.,  vol.  27,  p.  76.) 

To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  continue  the  collection  of  information 
as  to  the  best  modes  of  agriculture  by  irrigation,  six  thousand  dollars.  (Approved 
March  3,1893.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  27,  p.  741. ) 

To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  continue  the  collection  of  information 
as  to  the  best  modes  of  agriculture  by  irrigation,  six  thousand  dollars.  (Approved 
August  8, 1894.  Stat.  L. ,  vol.  28,  p.  271. ) 

To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  continue  the  collection  of  information 
as  to  the  best  modes  of  agriculture  by  irrigation,  fifteen  thousand  dollars. 
(Approved  March  2, 1895.  Stat.  L. ,  vol .  28,  p.  735. ) 

No  appropriations  for  irrigation  investigations  by  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  were  made  from  1895  to  1898: 

Irrigation  information:  For  the  purpose  of  collecting  from  agricultural  colleges, 
agricultural  experiment  stations,  and  other  sources,  including  the  employment  of 
practical  agents,  valuable  information  and  data  on  the  subject  of  irrigation,  and 
publishing  the  same  in  bulletin  form,  ten  thousand  dollars.  (Approved  March 
22, 1898.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  p.  335.) 

Irrigation  investigations:  To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  investigate 
and  report  upon  the  laws  and  institutions  relating  to  irrigation  and  upon  the  use 
of  irrigation  waters,  with  special  suggestions  of  better  methods  for  the  utilization 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


51 


of  irrigation  waters  in  agriculture  than  those  in  common  use,  and  for  the  prepa¬ 
ration.  printing,  and  illustration  of  reports  and  bulletins  on  irrigation;  and  the 
agricultural  experiment  stations  are  hereby  authorized  and  directed  to  cooperate 
with  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  in  carrying  out  said  investigations  in  such  man¬ 
ner  and  to  such  extent  as  may  be  warranted  by  a  due  regard  to  the  varying  con¬ 
ditions  and  needs  of  the  respective  States  and  Territories,  and  as  may  be  mutually 
agreed  upon;  and  ten  thousand  dollars  of  the  amount  hereby  appropriated  shall 
be  immediately  available,  thirty-five  thousand  dollars.  (Approved  March  1, 1899. 
Stat.  L.,  vol.  30,  p.  953.) 

Irrigation  investigations:  To  enable  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  investigate 
and  report  upon  the  laws  and  institutions  relating  to  irrigation  and  upon  the  use 
of  irrigation  waters,  with  especial  suggestions  of  better  methods  for  the  utilization 
of  irrigation  waters  in  agriculture  than  those  in  common  use,  and  for  the  prepa¬ 
ration,  printing,  and  illustration  of  reports  and  bulletins  on  irrigation;  and  the 
agricultural  experiment  stations  are  hereby  authorized  and  directed  to  cooperate 
with  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  in  carrying  out  said  investigations  in  such  man¬ 
ner  and  to  such  extent  as  may  be  warranted  by  a  due  regard  to  the  varying  con¬ 
ditions  and  needs  of  the  respective  States  and  Territories  as  may  be  mutually 
agreed  upon,  fifty  thousand  dollars.  (Approved  May  25,  1900.  Stat.  L.,  vol.  31, 
p.  199.) 

Summarized,  the  appropriations  for  irrigation  investigations  of  the 
Department  of  Agriculture  are  as  follows : 


Appropriations  for  irrigation  investigations  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture. 


Year. 

Item. 

Amount. 

Approved. 

Statutes  at 
Large. 

1890 

Artesian  wells  .. . 

$20, 000 
40,000 

i  0,000 
6,000 
6,000 
6,000 
15,000 

Apr.  4, 1890 
Sept.  30, 1890 
Mar.  3,1891 
July  5,1892 
Mar.  3,1893 
Aug.  8,1894 
Mar.  2, 1895 

Vol.  26,  p.  42 
Vol  26,  p.526 

1891 

Irrigation  investigation . 

1892 

Underflow . - . - . 

Vol.  26’  p  1052 

1893 

Modes  of  irrigation . . . 

Vol.  27,  p.  76 
Vol.  27,  p.741 
Vol.  28,  p.271 

1894 

. do . 

1895 

. do . 

1896 

. do . 

Vol.  28,  p.735 

1897 

1898 

1899 

Irrigation  information  ...  _ _ 

10,000 

35,000 

50,000 

Mar.  22, 1898 
Mar.  1,1899 
May  25,1900 

Vol.  30,  p.335 
Vol.  30,  p.953 

1900 

Irrigation  laws,  etc . 

1901 

_ do . . ». _ _ _ _ _ 

Vol.  31,  p.  199 

Total . 

198,000 

SUMMARY  OF  APPROPRIATIONS. 


Summarized,  the  direct  appropriations  are  as  follows: 


Summary  of  direct  appropriations. 


Item. 

Years. 

Amount. 

Arid-land  survey  (Powell)  . . . . . . . . 

1888-1890 

1895-1901 

1894-1901 

1890-1901 

$350, 000 
357,000 
700,000 
198,000 

Gaging  streams  (Walcott)  .  _  .  . . . 

Construction  ditches,  etc. .  Indian  Office . . . _ . . 

Irrigation  investigations,  Department  of  Agriculture . . . . 

Total  .  . . . 

1,605,000 

The  total  of  $1,605,000  appropriated  directly  for  surveys,  investiga¬ 
tions,  and  construction  having  to  do  with  irrigation  is  by  no  means 
the  total  chargeable  to  the  arid  regions.  It  forms  a  ♦portion  of  vari¬ 
ous  items  of  work  which  has  been  and  is  being  carried  on  by  several 
organizations  and  bureaus. 

For  example,  the  first  item  of  $350,000  for  arid-land  surveys  was 
for  the  most  part  devoted  to  topographic  mapping  of  the  catchment 


52 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


basins  of  the  important  streams,  work  which  previous  to  1888-1890 
had  been  carried  on  under  the  appropriation  for  topography,  and 
which  was  subsequently  resumed  under  that  head.  It  is,  therefore, 
but  a  small  part  of  the  several  million  dollars  already  expended  in 
mapping  the  public  lands  of  the  West. 

The  next  item  of  $357,000  for  gaging  the  streams  is  not  strictly 
chargeable  to  the  arid  region,  since  about  one-fourth  to  one-third  of 
the  amount  lias  been  expended  in  measuring  the  streams  in  the  humid 
regions  of  the  East,  where  water  power  is  of  greatest  importance. 

The  third  and  largest  item  in  the  statement,  $700,000,  is,  in  round 
numbers,  the  amount  appropriated  for  the  construction  of  ditches, 
canals,  and  reservoirs  for  the  Indians,  for  purchasing  water  rights, 
and  for  tools.  Many  times  this  amount  has  presumably  been  spent 
within  the  Indian  reservations,  the  greater  part  of  which  are  within 
the  arid  region,  in  other  work  relating  to  agriculture  by  irrigation. 
Not  all  of  this  $700,000  appropriation  has  been  expended,  as  much  of 
it  has  been  appropriated  for  water  rights  which  have  not  yet  been 
acquired. 

The  fourth  item  of  appropriation,  $198,000  to  the  Department  of 
Agriculture,  is  also  onty  a  small  proportion  of  the  total  amount 
expended  for  agricultural  colleges  and  experiment  stations  within 
the  arid  regions.  In  effect  it  increases  the  efficiency  of  the  experi¬ 
ment  stations  along  lines  of  work  which  have  been  initiated  toward 
assisting  the  farmers  of  the  arid  region  to  improve  their  condition. 

Besides  the  items  mentioned,  several  million  dollars  have  been 
expended  under  the  General  Land  Office  in  surveying  and  subdivid¬ 
ing  the  lands  of  the  arid  region;  also  in  various  military  expeditions 
and  in  explorations  for  railroads.  All  of  the  information  thus  obtained 
in  its  way  becomes  part  of  the  broad  knowledge  upon  which  must  be 
based  general  conclusions  as  to  the  extent  to  which  the  arid  lands  can 
be  redeemed  by  irrigation. 

While  on  the  one  hand  the  items  of  direct  appropriation  which  I 
have  noted  form  but  a  small  proportion  of  the  total  sum  expended 
upon  problems  connected  with  the  arid  land,  it  must  not  be  supposed 
that  these  appropriations  have  been  intended  or  expended  specifically 
in  ascertaining  the  cost  and  benefit  of  reclaiming  the  arid  region. 
Most  of  the  expenditures  have  been,  as  already  stated,  along  the  line 
of  obtaining  general  information  and  not  detailed  facts  upon  which 
estimates  can  be  based.  It  is  important  to  take  out  the  sums  which 
have  actually  been  expended  along  this  line,  and  to  ascertain  how 
much  more  work  should  be  done  to  definitely  discuss  the  subject  of 
water  conservation;  in  other  words,  in  making  surveys  on  which  to 
base  estimates. 

As  before  stated,  the  appropriations  made  up  to  the  present  time 
for  matters  pertaining  to  irrigation  have  been  available  for  what  may 
be  called  conclusive  results  to  onty  a  limited  extent.  The  general 
topographic  surveys  of  the  catchment  basins  of  the  streams  and  the 
measurement  of  the  flow  form  the  basis  of  knowledge,  but  in  them¬ 
selves  they  are  not  sufficient  for  preparing  the  estimates  of  costs  and 
benefits.  Out  of  the  first  appropriation  for  surveys  (that  of  1888-1890, 
$350,000)  about  $100,000  was  expended  in  examining  147  reservoir 
sites  and  in  preparing  estimates  and  details  for  the  following  reclama¬ 
tion  projects:  In  Montana,  on  Sun  River;  in  Colorado,  on  Arkansas 
River;  in  Kansas,  for  a  large  canal  line  in  the  western  part  of  the 
State;  in  Texas  and  New  Mexico,  for  the  proposed  international 
reservoir  above  El  Paso;  in  California,  for  a  reservoir  at  Clear  Lake, 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES, 


53 


for  exploring  Pit  River,  and  for  a  number  of  localities  in  the  high 
sierras;  in  Nevada  and  California,  for  water  storage  on  Truckee  and 
Carson  rivers;  in  Utah,  for  the  storage  of  water  in  Utah  Lake;  and 
in  Idaho,  for  the  diversion  of  Snake  River.  The  total  expenditure  on 
these  engineering  surveys — in  round  numbers,  1100,000 — was  approx¬ 
imately  $10,000  for  each  of  the  large  projects  studied.  The  remain¬ 
der  of  the  $350,000  was  expended  in  preparing  topographic  maps. 
Approximately  43,000  square  miles  of  important  river  basin  were 
mapped,  the  estimated  cost  being  not  far  from  $5  per  square  mile 
surveyed,  including  all  salaries  and  office  expenditures. 

Since  1890  only  a  few  detailed  estimates  have  been  prepared,  these 
being  possible  under  the  appropriation  for  preparing  reports  upon 
the  best  methods  for  utilizing  the  water  resources.  The  possibility 
of  water  storage  on  Gila  River  in  Arizona  has  been  carefully  dis¬ 
cussed;  also  conservation  projects  in  portions  of  California,  Nevada, 
Wyoming,  Montana,  and  Colorado,  as  already  mentioned.  (See  pp. 
27-30.)  The  amount  thus  expended  in  engineering  surveys  is  rela¬ 
tively  small,  and  must  be  notably  increased  before  a  complete  knoAvl- 
edge  of  the  cost  of  reclamation  can  be  had,  with  detailed  figures  as 
to  each  important  project. 

To  complete  the  examination  of  this  vast  area  in  ten  years  will 
necessitate  an  annual  expenditure  of,  say,  $10,000  a  year  in  each  of 
the  States  and  Territories  having  arid  and  semiarid  lands.  This 
amount  will  make  possible  systematic  measurements  of  the  streams, 
survev  of  reservoir  sites,  examination  of  the  character  of  the  founda- 
tions  of  dam  sites  from  which  to  estimate  the  cost  of  the  construction 
of  dams,  and  carry  on  other  examinations  exclusive  of  the  topo¬ 
graphic  mapping.  An  appropriation  of  $200,000  a  year  is  needed  to 
push  forward  this  work,  including  the  measurement  of  streams  and 
the  examination  and  mapping  of  underground  waters  and  artesian 
wells. 

The  estimates  made  for  continuing  this  work  during  the  next  fiscal 
year  are  as  follows : 


SPECIAL  SURVEYS  IN  ARID  AND  SEMIARID  REGIONS. 

Arizona: 

Surveying  reservoir  sites,  determining  amount  of  water  in  Gila  and 
Salt  rivers,  including  Santa  Cruz  River,  and  investigating  artesian 

conditions . . . . . .  $6, 000 

California: 

Northern— Surveys  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Kings,  Kern, 

and  San  Joaquin  rivers _ _ _ ....  _  10, 000 

Examination  and  mapping  of  underground  waters  in  San  Joaquin 

Valley . . _. . . . . ... .  . . . .  5,000 

Southern— Examination  and  mapping  of  underground  waters  in  San 

Bernardino  Valley _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  5,000 

Examination  of  country  adjacent  to  Colorado  River  and  estimates 
of  cost  of  utilizing  Colorado  River  by  pumping  or  by  gravity 
canals . .  . . . . . .  11,000 

Colorado: 

Surveys  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Platte  River  _ _  4, 000 

Examination  of  feasibility  of  storing  water  in  northeastern  Colorado.  3, 000 
Examination  of  reservoir  sites  on  Arkansas  River  and  Rio  Grande...  8,000 
Reconnaissance  for  diversion  of  Gunnison  River  in  southwestern  Col¬ 
orado  _ _ _  _ _ _  .  - - -  5, 000 

Examination  of  underground  waters  and  drilling  test  well  in  eastern 

Colorado _ _ _ _ _  _ _ _  _ _ _ _  10,000 

Idaho: 

Survey  for  diversions  of  water  from  Snake  River  and  obtaining  under¬ 
ground  waters  on  Snake  River  plains .  5, 000 

Examination  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Boise,  Weiser,  and 
Payette  and  Lost  rivers  of  Idaho . . .  4, 000 


54 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Kansas: 

Drilling  test  well  in  northwestern  Kansas . . .  10, 000 

Montana: 

Continuation  of  the  St.  Mary  River  surveys .  7, 000 

Continuation  of  the  Madison  River-Helena  survey . . . .  5, 000 

Surveys  for  diversion  of  water  from  Yellowstone  River. .. .  11,000 

Nebraska: 

Drilling  test  well  in  western  Nebraska .  10,000 

Nevada:  ' 

Continuation  of  reservoir  surveys  on  Carson  and  Walker  rivers _  9,000 

New  Mexico: 

Survey  of  reservoir  sites  on  Rio  Grande . .  6, 000 

North  Dakota: 

Continuation  of  mapping  of  underground  waters  and  survey  of  canal 

line  from  Missouri  River . .  .* . . . . .  10, 000 

Oregon: 

Continuation  of  examination  of  deep  waters  in  northwestern  Oregon.  4, 000 
Exploration  for  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Owyhee  and  Malheur 

rivers . . . . . . . . . .  -  5, 000 

South  Dakota: 

Investigation  of  deep  waters  in  western  part  of  State;  drilling  test  well .  10, 000 

Texas: 

Surveys  for  water  storage  in  trans-Pecos  Texas . .  . . .  5, 000 

Utah: 

Surveys  of  reservoir  sites  on  Sevier  River _ _ _ _  4, 000 

Examination  of  head  waters  of  Provo  and  Weber  rivers  .  ..  . . .  3, 000 

Reconnaissance  for  diversion  of  Grand  and  Green  rivers  in  southeast¬ 
ern  Utah. . . . .  5,000 

Washington: 

Surveys  of  reservoir  sites  on  head  waters  of  Yakima  River  and  tribu¬ 
taries  .  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6, 000 

Examination  of  artesian  conditions  of  central  Washington . .  4, 000 

Wyoming: 

Surveys  for  storage  and  diversion  of  Green  River  and  tributaries _  6, 000 

Surveys  for  conservation  of  water  on  North  Platte  River . . .  4. 000 


Total  for  special  surveys  in  arid  regions... . . .  200, 000 


In  estimating  the  cost  of  reclamation  of  the  lands  of  the  arid  regions, 
a  wide  latitude  is  possible,  since,  as  before  stated,  we  do  not  possess 
detailed  estimates  of  the  cost  of  each  large  project.  It  is  necessary, 
therefore,  to  fall  back  upon  a  general  knowledge,  such  as  that  which 
has  been  obtained  by  the  reconnoissances,  topographic  mapping,  and 
stream  gagings  just  described.  By  means  of  these,  certain  broad  facts 
have  been  developed;  but  these  must  be  supplemented  by  the  detailed 
engineering  surveys  before  exact  and  unqualified  statements  can  be 
made. 

The  largest  uncertain  factor  in  the  question  of  reclamation  is  the 
amount  of  water  which  can  be  rendered  available  through  storage  in 
the  ground,  through  seepage  or  percolation,  and  which  will  ultimately, 
after  many  months  or  years,  find  its  way  into  the  drainage  channels, 
or  rise  to  a  point  where  it  can  be  recovered  by  ordinary  wells.  The 
question,  also,  of  the  practicability  of  recovery  b}^  wells  rests  upon 
the  cost  of  power.  With  complete  water  conservation  in  the  moun¬ 
tains,  cheap  power  becomes  available  through  electrical  transmission 
by  which  to  recover  this  water  otherwise  lost.  Judging  from  the 
experience  of  the  developed  areas  of  the  arid  region,  it  may  be  esti¬ 
mated  that  if  water  is  conserved  for  the  direct  reclamation  of,  say, 
1,000,000  acres,  there  will  be  possible  an  ultimate  reclamation  of 
3,000,000  acres,  through  seepage  works,  pumping  plants,  and  other 
devices  erected  by  individuals.  In  other  words,  if  the  Government, 
by  means  of  large  storage  works  or  by  diverting  water  from  great 
rivers  by  means  of  tunnels  or  other  hydraulic  works,  should  provide 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


55 


water  for  25,000,000  acres  which  otherwise  could  not  he  irrigated,  it 
would  render  possible  the  gradual  utilization  of  the  entire  75,000,000 
acres,  the  remainder  being  reclaimable  through  the  smaller  or  indi¬ 
vidual  systems. 

The  area  of  land  reclaimable  if  water  could  be  had  amounts  to  sev¬ 
eral  hundred  million  acres,  but  the  supply  of  water  being  limited,  the 
amount  which  can  actually  be  reclaimed  depends  directly  upon  the 
.  water  resources.  These,  though  fluctuating  from  year  to  year,  are  fixed 
by  nature  within  narrow  limits,  there  being  probably  enough,  when 
properly  conserved,  to  irrigate  75,000,000  acres.  It  is  not  necessary,  as 
before  noted,  for  the  Government  to  conserve  water  for  all  of  this  area, 
as  by  the  removal  of  certain  great  obstacles  individual  enterprises  will 
be  able  to  put  water  upon  the  greater  part  of  the  land.  Thus,  as 
above  stated,  it  may  be  fair  to  assume  that  if  the  Government  con¬ 
serves  water  for  25,000,000  acres,  individuals  or  corporations  will  be 
able  to  obtain  water  for  the  remaining  50,000,000. 

The  cost  of  water  conservation,  as  shown  by  surveys  in  different 
parts  of  the  United  States,  may  range  from  less  than  $1  to  over  $10  per 
acre  reclaimed.  As  an  average,  $5  per  acre  may  be  taken  as  the  cost 
of  reclamation  in  a  large  way. 

It  is  not  necessary  nor  advisable  to  attempt  to  reclaim  all  of  the 
land  at  once,  but  it  is  essential  that  certain  steps  be  taken  looking 
toward  such  action.  It  will  be  more  economical  to  make  small 
expenditures  at  first  and  gradually  increase  these,  so  that  in  order  to 
conserve  the  water  supply  expenditures  shall  extend  throughout  at 
least  twenty-five  years.  These  expenditures  may  best  be  made  at  the 
rate  of,  say,  $2,000,000  per  annum  for  five  years;  $4,000,000  per 
annum  for  the  next  five  years;  $5,000,000  per  annum  for  the  next  five 
years,  and  $7,000,000  per  annum  for  ten  years  additional,  or,  in  all, 
$125,000,000.  These  amounts,  it  has  been  estimated,  can  be  realized 
from  the  disposal  of  the  public  lands.  Ten  per  cent  of  these  amounts 
will  be  needed  for  the  surveys  and  examinations  leading  up  to  the 
construction  of  the  reservoirs. 

With  this  amount  invested  by  the  Government  in  the  removal  of 
obstacles  to  development,  it  will  be  possible,  as  already  stated,  for 
private  capital  to  invest  amounts  many  times  as  great  in  putting  the 
lands  under  irrigation. 

The  cost  of  maintenance  of  permanent  works  will  be  relatively 
small,  and  following  the  precedent  set  by  law  and  by  custom  the  cost 
of  maintenance  should  be  assessed  against  the  lands  receiving  the 
water  whenever  the  works  are  completed  and  the  land  passes  com¬ 
pletely  into  private  ownership. 

In  regard  to  artesian-well  explorations,  I  wish  to  bring  out  one  pointv 
which  Mr.  Reeder  has  overlooked,  and  that  is  that  this  vast  Plains 
area  is  unique  in  this  respect.  It  is  a  country  which  belongs  in  great 
part  to  the  United  States.  It  is  a  country  where  people  have  attempted 
to  make  homes,  where  thousands  of  people  have  been  driven  out  by 
lack  of  water.  The  attempt  to  secure  water  bj7  individual  enterprise 
involves  such  a  large  expenditure  relative  to  the  value  of  the  property 
of  the  people  and  to  the  large  area  of  land  owned  by  the  United  States 
that  it  differs  from  conditions  of  all  other  places  where  water  has  been 
searched  for  and  proved  to  exist  by  private  enterprise.  The  United 
States  is  the  great  land  owner.  The  individuals  have  tried  to  get 
water  and  have  failed,  and  have  come  almost  to  the  point  of  actual " 
starvation  over  a  large  part  of  this  area  for  the  want  of  it. 

The  Chairman.  In  making  your  statement  and  report  as  to  the 


56 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


amount  of  appropriations  for  irrigation  of  arid  lands  for  these  Depart¬ 
ments,  could  you  also  give  us  a  summary  of  what  has  been  accom¬ 
plished? 

Mr.  Newell.  That  I  think  could  be  done,  although  the  facts  are 
scattered  through  many  volumes  of  public  reports.  In  the  matter  of 
the  Indian  Office,  where  the  large  expenditures  have  been  (nearly 
two-thirds  of  the  whole),  I  doubt  whether  there  are  any  printed  reports 
as  to  what  has  been  done.  • 

The  Chairman.  We  can  probably  find  out  something  from  the  In¬ 
dian  Office. 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Barham.  What  would  the  probability  be — taking  the  average 
of  what  has  come  into  the  Treasury — what  would  the  probability  be  as 
to  the  amount  of  receipts  from  that  same  source  in  the  future? 

Mr.  Newell.  So  far  as  I  can  learn  from  the  Land  Office,  the  re¬ 
ceipts  for  the  next  few  years  will  be  relatively  as  large.  They  may 
run  up  to  $2,000,000;  but  I  think  the  receipts  for  the  last  fiscal  year, 
ending  June  30,  1900,  and  amounting  to  $2,836,883,  are  considerabty 
above  the  average,  although  the  people  in  the  Land  Office  do  not 
seem  to  think  there  will  be  much  diminution. 

The  cash  receipts  of  the  General  Land  Office  from  disposal  of  public 
lands  are  derived  mainly  from  commuted  homestead,  desert  land, 
timber  and  stone  land,  mineral  land,  and  coal  land,  in  the  order 
named. 

The  total  amount  received  on  account  of  sales  of  public  lands 
decreased  from  about  $11,000,000  in  1888  to  about  $900,000  in  1897, 
and  has  steadily  increased  since,  until,  at  the  close  of  the  fiscal  year 
ending  June  30,  1900,  the  amount  was  nearly  $3,000,000. 

This  will  probably  continue  to  increase  for  several  years  to  come, 
owing  to  the  new  law  known  as  the  “Free  homes  bill,”  the  opening  of 
Indian  reservations  to  settlement,  and  for  other  reasons. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  entering  upon  a  com¬ 
prehensive  plan  of  reclamation  in  the  arid  region  will  stimulate  set¬ 
tlement  in  that  region,  and  tliereb}7  increase  that  income? 

Mr.  Newell.  Certainty.  • 

Mr.  Barham.  What  provision  is  there  for  the  sale  of  arid  lands? 

Mr.  Newell.  There  is  a  commutation  of  the  homestead  entry,  then 
there  is  the  desert-land  entry  of  320  acres,  the  mineral  lands,  the 
stone  lands,  and  various  pieces  of  land,  which,  though  small  in  them¬ 
selves,  command  a  considerable  price. 

Mr.  Barham.  But  as  to  arid  lands:  There  is  no  provision  for  the 
sale  of  arid  lands,  and  they  are  still  open  to  homestead  and  desert- 
land  entry? 

Mr.  Newlands.  Is  it  not  your  opinion  that  unless  within  a  few  years 
a  system  of  reclamation  is  entered  upon,  the  proceeds  from  the  sale 
of  Government  lands  will  be  greatly  reduced? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir.  When  all  the  forest  reserves  necessary 
have  been  created,  the  receipts  then  will  drop  off  very  much.  Just 
at  this  time  there  is  considerable  activity  in  the  Land  Office,  which 
will  undoubtedly  cease. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Is  not  the  large  sum  received  during  the  last  year 
from  the  sale  of  salt  or  mineral  lands  caused  by  the  increased  activity 
in  mining  in  those  States? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir,  largely;  but  it  is  not  to  be  charged  to  that 
wholly. 

Mr.  Barham.  Have  you  any  completed  survey  and  estimate  of  the 
cost  of  reclamation  of  any  section  or  watershed? 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


57 


Mr.  Newell.  There  is  a  notable  one  which  we  have  completed,  and 
in  which  great  public  interest  is  now  centering — that  on  the  Gila  River. 
That  has  just  been  before  the  Senate  and  a  provision  has  been  inserted 
in  the  Indian  bill  (H.  R.  12904)  beginning  the  construction,  as  follows: 

For  completing  the  necessary  preliminary  investigations  and  plans  and  estimates 
of  cost  in  detail  for  the  construction  of  a  dam  across  the  Gila  River  near  San 
Carlos,  Arizona,  for  storing  the  flood  waters  of  the  Gila  River,  the  water  so  stored 
to  be  used,  first,  for  the  benefit  of  the  Pima,  Papago,  and  Maricopa  Indians  for 
irrigating  the  lands  of  the  Gila  River  Reservation,  the  stored  water  in  excess  of 
the  needs  of  the  Indians  to  be  used  for  reclaiming  and  irrigating  vacant  public 
lands;  and  also  for  acquiring  and  preparing  the  dam  site  and  for  continuing  the 
measurement  of  the  daily  flow  of  water  in  the  Gila  River,  and  for  surveying  and 
locating  and  preparing  plans  and  estimates  of  cost  of  construction,  with  Indian 
labor,  of  the  necessary  canals  for  carrying  the  water  from  said  reservoir  to  the 
lands  to  be  irrigated  on  the  said  Indian  reservation,  and  investigating  the  amount 
of  water  necessary  to  be  reserved  for  the  use  of  the  said  Indians,  and  for  examin¬ 
ing.  surveying,  and  designating  the  vacant  public  lands  which  could  be  irrigated 
with  the  stored  water  from  said  reservoir  in  excess  of  the  needs  of  the  Indians, 
and  in  preparing  the  plans  and  estimates  for  the  construction  of  said  reservoirs 
and  canals,  with  detailed  reasons  therefor,  and  giving  as  accurate  an  estimate  as 
possible  of  the  total  amount  which  could  be  received  from  the  sale  of  the  land 
irrigated  to  actual  settlers,  with  the  facts  and  circumstances  upon  which  such 
estimate  is  based,  the  sum  of  one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  or  so  much  thereof 
as  may  be  necessary,  the  same  to  be  expended  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Interior:  Provided,  1  hat  for  all  unski i led  labor  required  Indians  shall  be 
employed  so  far  as  practicable.  And  the  Secretaiy  of  the  Interior  is  hereby 
directed  to  reserve  from  entry  and  settlement  all  unappropriated  lands  within 
townships  three,  four,  five,  six,  and  seven  south,  ranges  eight,  nine,  and  ten  east  of 
Gila  and  Salt  River  meridian,  until  the  examination,  survey,  and  designation  of 
irrigable  lands  hereinbefore  provided  for  shall  have  been  completed;  and  upon  the 
approval  of  such  survey  and  designation  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  the  lands 
not  designated  as  irrigable  shall  be  restored  to  entry  and  settlement. 

And  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  authorized  and  directed,  out  of  the  appro¬ 
priation  immediately  preceding,  to  cause  to  be  made  by  competent  engineers  an 
investigation  and  report  as  to  whether  an  adequate  water  supply  for  the  Indians 
upon  said  reservation  can  be  obtained  by  the  method  recommended  by  Indian 
Inspector  W alker  H.  Graves,  in  his  report  dated  Pima  Indian  Reservation,  Arizona, 
September  twelfth,  nineteen  hundred,  and  if  so,  at  what  cost:  Provided ,  That 
nothing  herein  shall  be  construed  as  in  any  way  committing  the  United  States  to 
the  construction  of  said  dam  at  San  Car.  os. 

Mr.  Barham.  Did  you  estimate  the  cost  of  a  system  of  irrigation 
there? 

Mr.  Newell.  We  estimated  the  cost  of  water  conservation.  The 
distribution  system  was  also  estimated  upon,  but  I  do  not  include  it 
because  it  is  something  which  will  take  care  of  itself.  The  construc¬ 
tion  is  so  comparatively  easy  that  if  the  system  is  built  the  water  can 
be  disposed  of,  and  the  distribution  necessarily  follows. 

Mr.  Barham.  Have  you  any  other  completed  system  of  surveys? 

Mr.  Newell.  The  other  estimated  systems  are  on  the  Humboldt  in 
Nevada,  the  Truckee  in  Nevada,  which  offers  interstate  problems, 
and  the  diversion  of  the  St.  Mary  River  to  the  Milk  River,  the  survey 
of  which  is  not  fully  completed.  This  is  in  northern  Montana,  the 
St.  Mary  River  being  a  stream  rising  in  the  United  States,  in  the 
Rocky  Mountains,  receiving  the  drainage  from  them  and  carrying  it 
immediately  north.  East  of  it  heads  the  Milk  River,  which  flows 
for  several  hundred  miles  before  emptying  into  the  Missouri  River. 
Milk  River,  although  so  long,  does  not  receive  enough  water  to  sup¬ 
ply  a  continuous  flow  through  its  whole  length,  at  all  seasons.  By  a 
relatively  short  diversion  canal  it  is  possible  to  take  the  water  out 
of  the  St.  Mary  River  and  let  it  flow  into  the  Milk  River;  in  other 
words,  to  divert  it  before  reaching  the  Canadian  border,  and  turn  it 
through  Milk  River,  whose  waters  run  finally  into  the  Gulf  of  Mexico. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Have  you  any  other  completed  system? 


58 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


What  I  am  trying  to  get  at  is,  Have  you  anything  that  you  could 
report  at  the  next  session  of  Congress? 

Mr.  Newell.  We  have  a  number  of  projects  and  estimates  reported 
at  this  session,  such  as  the  Humboldt  and  the  Truckee,  and  the  King 
River  and  the  Salinas  River  in  California,  the  St.  Mary  in  Montana, 
the  Grey  Hull  in  Wyoming. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Then  if  we  call  for  a  complete  survey  or 
estimate,  you  can  give  it,  of  five  or  six  of  the  separate  problems? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  What  would  be  the  relative  expense  of  carrying 
out  Judge  Barham’s  bill  (H.  R.  13779)? 

Mr.  Barham.  That  simply  calls  for  a  special  survey  of  everything 
necessary,  including  wells  and  reservoirs,  and  the  diversion  of  streams. 

The  Chairman.  Your  bill  practically  covers  the  whole  scheme,  and 
calls  for  information  as  to  just  how  much  of  this  work  there  is,  and 
how  much  it  will  cost,  and  how  much  land  in  the  United  States,  as  I 
understand,  can  be  irrigated  successfully,  and  what  will  be  the  cost? 

Mr.  Newell.  That  is  as  difficult  to  answer  as  it  would  be  to  say 
what  will  be  the  total  cost  of  the  rural  free-delivery  system,  or  of  the 
river  and  harbor  improvements,  the  amount  of  the  river  and  harbor 
bill;  but  to  set  some  sort  of  a  reasonable  limit,  I  will  say  that  an 
annual  appropriation  of  $250,000  a  year,  continued  for  six  or  seven 
years,  would  doubtless  cover  the  cost  of  survey  of  all  of  the  feasible 
schemes. 

Mr.  Barham.  He  does  not  mean  by  that  that  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  will  irrigate  the  lands;  that,  is  simply  for  the  surveys. 
That  amount  is  safe  to  mention,  but  not  without  qualification. 

Mr.  King.  Would  it  be  enough  to  make  an  appropriation  of  $1,500,000 
now,  to  be  expended  by  the  Geological  Survey  wifcli  iieremptory  instruc¬ 
tions  in  the  bill,  such  as  Congress  may  give,  that  the  Geological  Sur¬ 
vey  ma}r  enter  upon  a  comprehensive  survey  of  the  arid  lands  owned 
by  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  and,  in  order  to  speedily 
accomplish  the  work  at  the  earliest  possible  date,  to  provide  that  the 
Department  shall  employ  the  best  engineers  obtainable,  with  a  view 
to  reporting,  first,  the  number  of  acres  susceptible  of  reclamation; 
second,  the  sources  of  water;  and,  third,  the  cost  of  constructing  dams 
for  diverting  streams  that  you  do  not  need  to  store ;  and  also  the  con¬ 
struction  of  the  necessary  dams  and  canals  which  the  Government,  if 
it  embarks  upon  the  enterprise,  should  construct,  submitting  all  that 
to  Congress.  Don’t  you  think  it  would  be  better  to  make  one  large 
appropriation  and  enter  upon  this  scheme  in  a  comprehensive  manner 
rather  than  to  take  it  up  in  pieces  immediately,  without  presenting  to 
the  people  of  the  United  States  the  scheme  in  all  its  fullness,  and  all 
of  its  benefits  and  disadvantages,  if  there  are  any? 

Mr.  Newell.  That  would  be  the  most  satisfactory  and  economical 
way — to  provide  an  appropriation  running  over  a  considerable  length 
of  time.  The  great  trouble  with  annual  appropriations  is  the  uncer¬ 
tainty  of  the  future  and  the  difficulty  of  starting  surveys  at  once  and 
getting  the  best  men.  With  annual  appropriations  you  can  not  assure 
them  that  vou  can  continue  them  at  this  work  for  a  reasonable  length 
of  time,  or  that  the  result  will  be  accomplished.  So  that  economy  and 
efficiency  would  be  promoted  by  an  appropriation  running  over  a  length 
of  two  or  three  years. 

The  Chairman.  In  other  words,  you  think  it  would  be  desirable  to 
have  an  appropriation  fully  covering  the  total  cost  of  surveys,  and 
then  leave  the  Geological  Survey  a  reasonable  length  of  time. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


59 


Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir.  If  you  consider  any  large  corporation  or 
organization  which  is  endeavoring  to  ascertain  what  they  can  do  in 
such  matters,  they  never  try  to  rush  through,  but  take  plenty  of  time 
to  mature  the  matter  thoroughly.  In  the  matter  of  the  Croton  dam, 
ten  years  were  spent  in  making  and  discussing  the  plans  and  in  ascer¬ 
taining  what  methods  were  feasible.  In  the  matter  of  the  large  dam  for 
the  municipality  of  Boston,  years  were  spent  in  completing  plans.  In 
hydraulic  works  more  than  in  any  other  enterprises  great  care  and  fore¬ 
thought  must  be  exercised,  for  there  is  not  the  opportunity  of  repair¬ 
ing  mistakes  that  there  is  in  railroad  construction  or  in  anything  else 
of  that  kind.  If  you  make  a  mistake  it  must  be  paid  for  by  future 
generations,  either  in  life  or  in  property.  So  that  every  large  enter¬ 
prise  in  the  way  of  hydraulic  work  must  be  entered  upon  with  reason¬ 
able  deliberation,  as  is  shown  by  the  instances  of  all  successful  works 
of  that  sort. 

Mr.  Barham.  Then  let  this  committee,  which  is  not  an  appropria¬ 
tions  committee — let  it  authorize — and  that  is  within  its  jurisdiction — 
a  complete  system  of  surveys.  Let  us  authorize  the  work  the  same  as 
is  done  in  the  Interstate  and  Foreign  Commerce  Committee  and  all 
the  other  committees  interested  in  appropriations — the  Rivers  and 
Harbors  Committee  and  all  the  others — and  let  us  authorize  it  here; 
and  do  not  let  us  say  anything  about  an  appropriation,  but  say  “An 
examination  is  hereby  authorized,  not  to  exceed  in  cost  $2,000,000 
or  $3,000,000” — whatever  you  think  is  going  to  cover  the  cost — say 
nothing  about  an  appropriation.  There  is  an  authorization.  Then 
the  Appropriations  Committee  will  call  you  in  to  ascertain  how  much 
you  need  next  year  for  surveys — $50,000,  $250,000,  $500,000,  or  what¬ 
ever  you  need.  From  year  to  year  you  will  appear  before  this  com¬ 
mittee  just  as  you  would  do  in  regard  to  light-houses  or  those  other 
things,  in  order  to  state  what  you  can  judiciously  and  properly  use 
the  next  year  in  making  surveys.  And  so  you  will  commence  at  the 
foundation  rock,  and  the  whole  system  will  be  properly  worked  out. 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir.  In  March,  1888,  a  joint  resolution  was 
passed  authorizing  this  work  of  which  the  chairman  has  spoken.  We 
have  gradually  built  up  the  work  along  those  lines.  The  first  year  of 
which  I  spoke  the  appropriation  was  $12,500;  the  next  year  it  was 
$24,000;  the  next  year  $50,000,  and  the  present  year  it  is  $100,000. 
And  we  are  building  up  along  those  lines  as  rapidly  as  we  can  develop 
good  men  and  good  methods  and  do  it  economically.  Now,  I  under¬ 
stand  the  irrigation  association  desire  that  this  amount  be  increased 
to  $250,000.  AYhenever  the  work  is  placed  on  such  a  basis,  we  will  be 
able  to  push  forward  along  the  lines  suggested  and  already  embodied 
in  the  law.  This  is  simply  a  question  of  getting  sufficient  funds  to 
cover  the  great  area  affected  by  your  action,  which  is  an  area  larger 
than  all  civilized  Europe. 

A  part  of  any  such  investigation  involves  the  examination  of  under¬ 
ground  waters,  extending  under  an  area  of  the  Great  Plains  which  is 
larger  than  that  of  France.  Part  of  it  involves  the  examination  of 
reservoir  sites,  each  of  which  is  larger  than  that  constructed  by  the 
city  of  New  York  or  Boston,  and  upon  which  a  number  of  years  were 
spent  in  surveys.  We  do  not  propose  to  do  it  as  thoroughly  as 
that,  but  we  do  propose  to  do  it  thoroughly  enough  to  stand  adverse 
criticism. 

The  next  step,  if  the  Government  is  to  do  anything  further  than  it 
has  done,  is  to  take  up  one  of  these  projects,  such  as  the  San  Carlos 
dam,  and  decide  whether  it  is  to  be  built  or  not. 


60 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Sutherland.  Would  we  not  need  necessarily  to  have  the  infor¬ 
mation  first,  before  Congress  would  authorize  it  or  anything  else? 

Mr.  Reeder.  It  seems  to  me  that  we  have  already  been  four  years 
right  along  that  line,  of  finding  out  what  we  can  do.  Now,  the  propo¬ 
sition  is  to  put  in  one  of  these  dams  and  find  out  what  is  practicable, 
and  then  to  continue  right  along  that  line. 

Mr.  Newlands.  While  you  are  getting  practical  results,  do  you 
think  it  is  wise  to  have  these  large  appropriations  for  a  series  of  years, 
or  to  appropriate  immediately  for  the  construction  of  a  few  of  those 
enterprises  for  which  the  plans  have  alread}^  been  made,  and  to  con¬ 
duct  also  continuous  investigations? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir.  It  seems  to  me  we  can  take  some  one  or 
more  of  these  enterprises,  the  plans  for  which  are  available,  which 
apparently  would  yield  the  largest  results. 

Mr.  Newlands.  With  reference  to  these  plans,  it  is  suggested  that 
the  funds  from  the  arid  and  semiarid  States  should  be  segregated,  and 
a  special  fund  should  be  created  in  the  Treasury  to  be  devoted  to  the 
work  of  irrigation  and  investigation.  I  would  ask  you  whether  the 
Geological  Survey  is  ready  to  go  ahead  with  both  of  these  methods 
with  practical  results? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes;  we  have  a  body  of  trained  and  skilled  young 
men  who  have  had  experience  in  investigation  and  construction,  and 
if  the  money  was  available  for  any  one  of  these  projects,  the  work 
would  be  started  at  once.  At  the  same  time  I  think  it  would  be  better 
to  have  the  investigation  continue  as  it  has  been,  an  item  in  the 
sundry  civil  bill,  and  devote  the  reclamation  fund  to  the  work  of  con¬ 
struction.  We  have  arrived  at  this  condition  where  Congress  is  up 
against  the  necessity  for  doing  something.  There  is  no  longer  afiy 
need  of  delay  for  further  information  regarding  certain  specific  proj¬ 
ects,  for  we  have  a  number  of  those  which  are  well  matured  and  con¬ 
sidered  and  can  be  entered  upon  to-day. 

Mr.  Barham.  Do  j^ou  suppose  that  the  other  arid-land  States  and 
the  other  States  in  the  Union  are  going  to  permit  California  to  carry 
out  one  of  these  projects  and  knowing  that  there  is  no  comprehensive 
system — everybody  knows  that  this  can  be  done;  there  is  no  question 
about  it — but  the  question  is,  how  much  is  the  whole  thing  going  to 
cost?  You  can  not  answer  that,  and  nobody  else  can. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Suppose  when  the  first  river  and  harbor  improve¬ 
ment  was  proposed  that  that  question  had  been  raised.  We  want  a 
comprehensive  system  of  improvements  here,  of  course.  Three  hun¬ 
dred  and  twenty  million  dollars  have  been  spent  on  rivers  and  harbors. 
Suppose  that  when  the  improvement  of  our  rivers  and  harbors  was 
first  suggested  the  statement  had  been  made  that  those  improvements 
would  mount  up  to  such  a  sum;  it  would  have  appalled  the  imagination. 

Mr.  Wilson.  Canal  building  alone  has  cost  over  $300,000,000. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes;  and  that  sum  would  have  been  regarded  as 
prohibitory  of  the  whole  plan. 

Mr.  Barham.  There  is  a  lot  of  water  that  can  be  used  yet? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir.  That  limits  it  in  one  respect.  The  private 
capital  which  can  be  put  into  this  development  will  make  possible  an 
immense  amount  of  construction  which  is  now  impossible. 

Mr.  Barham.  On  the  bill  of  Mr.  Newlands  we  are  legislating  in 
advance  of  conditions.  That  is  my  judgment  on  that  matter.  We 
should  first  have  all  the  facts  before  we  undertake  to  legislate.  In  the 
very  nature  of  things,  before  you  have  a  completed  project  the  Con¬ 
gress  of  the  United  States  is  not  going  to  enter  upon  the  irrigation  of 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


61 


the  arid  lands.  We  do  not  have  to  have  them  all  in;  that  is  not  the 
purpose.  But  we  are  going  to  give  the  people  of  the  United  States 
the  understanding  that  we  are  to  irrigate  all  the  arid  lands  that  can 
be  irrigated.  W e  are  going  to  enter  upon  a  comprehensive  system ; 
we  are  not  going  into  California  because  there  is  a  little  place  there 
that  can  be  irrigated,  or  into  Nevada  or  some  other  State,  but  we  are 
going  to  irrigate  all  the  arid  region,  and  it  will  take  one  hundred  and 
fifty  years  to  do  it. 

Mr.  Newell.  It  seems  to  me  that  is  comparable  to  saying  that  we 
should  not  improve  New  York  Harbor  before  we  know  just  1iowt  much 
every  other  harbor  on  the  Atlantic  coast  is  going  to  cost. 

Mr.  Barham.  That  is  not  the  question,  but  we  want  the  people  of 
the  United  States  to  understand  that  we  are  going  to  enter  upon  a 
comprehensive  system ;  that  we  are  not  going  simply  into  any  one  little 
project  such  as  that  in  California. 

Mr.  Newell.  Is  it  not  understood  that  if  we  create  a  reclamation 
fund  and  devote  it  to  projects  in  first  one  and  then  another  section, 
would  not  it  carry  with  it  the  conclusion  that  the  fund  is  available  for 
all? 


STATEMENT  OF  HON.  FRANK  W.  MONDELL,  A  REPRESENTATIVE 
IN  CONGRESS  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  WYOMING. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  thank  you  very  much,  gentlemen,  for  giving  me 
the  opportunity  to  discuss  the  matter  of  reclamation  of  arid  lands 
before  the  committee  for  a  few  moments.  I  want  to  discuss  the  sub¬ 
ject  from  two  standpoints,  or  along  two  lines;  first,  with  regard  to 
the  general  plan  or  system  to  be  adopted,  or  which  may  be  adopfied, 
and  second,  with  regard  to  the  bill  I  have  introduced,  and  which  is 
before  the  committee,  and  is  as  follows: 

[H.  R.  14165,  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  second  session.] 

A  BILL  Dedicating  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of  public  lands  to  the  construction  of  works  in  the 

aid  of  irrigation,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of 
America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act  the 
proceeds  from  the  sales  of  public  lands,  except  such  as  are  set  aside  by  law  for 
educational  purposes,  shall  be  used,  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  for  the  survey  and  construction  of  storage  reservoirs,  diversion  and 
other  hydraulic  works  in  the  arid  and  semiarid  regions,  for  the  purpose  of  devel¬ 
oping  and  making  available  the  waters  that  now  run  to  waste,  for  use  in  the  irri¬ 
gation  and  reclamation  of  arid  lands. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  hereby  authorized  to  make  such 
surveys  and  examinations  as  may  be  necessary  to  determine  the  necessity  for,  and 
the  practicability  of,  the  construction  of  works  for  the  purposes  mentioned  in 
section  one,  and  may,  upon  such  determination,  after  proper  public  notice,  let  con¬ 
tracts  for  the  construction  of  the  same;  but  no  contract  shall  be  entered  into 
unless  there  shall  be  funds  available  as  provided  in  section  one,  and  no  contract 
shall  be  entered  into  for  any  project  the  cost  of  which,  when  complete,  shall 
exceed  five  hundred  thousand  dollars,  without  authority  of  Congress. 

Sec.  3.  That  from  and  after  the  beginning  of  the  survey  of  any  project  herein 
provided  for,  all  entries  made  of  public  lands  on  which  such  project  may  be 
located,  or  which  may  be  required  for  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  such 
project,  shall  be  subject  to  such  use  for  the  period  of  two  years,  at  the  expiration  of 
which  time  such  lands  shall  become  subject  to  the  entries  aforesaid,  unless  in  the 
meantime  permanently  reserved  by  law  for  the  purposes  aforementioned. '  That 
all  filings,  entries,  and  locations  of  land,  desert  in  character,  made  after  the  tender 
for  bids  on  any  projects  above  referred  to,  and  determined  by  the  Secretary  of 


62 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


the  Interior  to  be  irrigable  from  the  waters  thereby  rendered  available,  and  from 
no  other  source,  shall  be  subject  to  the  requirements  of  the  desert-land  laws. 

Sec.  4.  That  no  contract  shall  be  let  for  any  of  the  works  hereinbefore  provided 
until  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  have  determined  to  his  satisfaction  that 
the  State  within  which  such  works  are  to  be  constructed  has  provided  an  ade¬ 
quate  system  o:  laws  for  the  public  control  of  streams  and  the  just  and  final 
determination  of  rights  to  water  therefrom,  which  make  beneficial  use  the  basis, 
the  measure,  and  the  limit  of  the  right,  and  administrative  officers  necessary  to 
insure  the  delivery  of  the  water  rendered  available  to  those  entitled  thereto. 

The  irrigation  congress,  of  which  you  all  know,  and  which  has  held 
annual  sessions  for  many  years,  after  a  long  discussion  of  the  subject 
as  to  what  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  would  be  asked  to  do  by 
that  congress,  finally,  in  their  platform  last  fall,  decided  to  confine 
their  request  to  Congress  to  the  subject  of  storage  and  conservation 
of  waters.  They  adopted  as  their  motto  “  Save  the  forests  and  store 
the  floods.”  Their  resolutions  were  very  brief.  I  was  chairman  of 
the  subcommittee  which  drafted  them ;  they  were  unanimously  adopted, 
and  are  as  follows: 

We  hail  with  satisfaction  the  fact  that  both  the  great  political  parties  of  the 
nation  in  the  last  campaign  declared  in  favor  of  the  reclamation  of  arid  America 
in  order  that  settlers  might  build  homes  on  the  public  domain,  and  to  that  end 
we  urge  upon  Congress  that  national  appropriations  commensurate  with  the 
magnitude  of  the  problem  should  be  made  for  the  preservation  of  the  forests  and 
the  reforestation  of  denuded  areas  as  national  storage  reservoirs,  and  for  the  con¬ 
struction  by  the  National  Government  as  part  of  its  policy  of  internal  improve¬ 
ment  of  storage  reservoirs  and  other  works  for  flood  protection,  and  to  save  for 
use  in  aid  of  navigation  and  irrigation  the  waters  which  now  run  to  waste,  and 
for  the  development  of  artesian  and  subterranean  sources  of  water  supply. 

The  water  of  all  streams  should  forever  remain  subject  to  public  control, iand 
the  right  of  use  of  water  for  irrigation  should  inhere  in  the  land  irrigated,  and 
beneficial  use  be  the  basis  of  measure  and  limit  of  the  right. 

Now,  the  question  of  the  irrigation  of  the  arid  lands  of  the  United 
States,  as  we  all  appreciate,  is  a  very  large  question.  Beginning  at 
the  beginning  and  going  through  the  whole  process,  down  to  where 
we  convey  water  to  all  the  lands  that  can  be  irrigated  in  the  United 
States  at  a  reasonable  cost,  is  covering  an  enormous  territory,  in  fact 
and  in  point  of  expenditure.  Clearly,  the  diversion  of  the  smaller 
streams  which  flow  near  the  surface  of  the  surrounding  country  and 
the  distribution  of  their  waters  over  lands  for  their  irrigation  is  not  a 
public  work,  it  seems  to  me.  The  question  then  arises,  What  portion 
of  the  work  to  be  done  in  connection  with  the  reclamation  of  arid 
lands  is  national  work?  What  part  of  the  work  may  the  Government 
undertake — constitutionally  undertake?  Although  I  am  not  a  consti¬ 
tutional  lawyer  and  do  not  pretend  to  be  an  authority  on  the  Consti¬ 
tution  in  this  particular,  I  am  very  positive  in  the  opinion  that  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  does  not  give  us  any  authority  to 
actually  irrigate  land  or  peddle  water.  But  there  is  a  work  in  con¬ 
nection  with  the  reclamation  of  arid  lands  which,  in  my  opinion,  is  a 
national  work.  What,  then,  is  the  line  of  demarcation  between  the 
work  which  the  National  Government  should  undertake  and  the  work 
which  should  be  left  to  the  States,  associations  under  the  States,  or 
to  individuals?  It  seems  to  me  the  line  of  demarcation  is  where  stor¬ 
age  and  conservation,  including  the  diversion  of  large  streams,  ends 
and  the  actual  distribution  of  water  over  lands  begins,  and  that  the 
work  of  conserving  the  waters  of  the  United  States,  of  making  them 
available,  so  that  the  State,  the  corporation  under  the  State,  the  indi¬ 
vidual,  or  the  association  of  farmers  may  take  up  the  work  of  actual 
reclamation — that  that  work  is  a  national  work. 

Mr.  King.  Do  you  see  any  distinction  between  the  power  of  the 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


63 


Government  to  store  and  build  a  reservoir  and  to  pnt  in  a  large  dam 
in  Snake  River,  for  instance,  in  Idaho,  which  is  essential  for  the  irri¬ 
gation  and  reclamation  of  a  vast  territory?  Is  there  any  difference 
between  having  a  dam  to  store  flood  waters  and  building  a  dam  in  a 
great  river  which  is  necessary  for  and  which  will  insure  the  reclama¬ 
tion  of  extensive  tracts  contiguous  to  it? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  do  not  think  there  is  a  very  great  difference. 
Understand  me,  that  when  I  refer  to  conservation  I  do  not  consider 
that  conservation  is  fully  carried  out  by  the  construction  of  storage 
reservoirs.  There  is  a  diversion  which  is  a  conservation.  The  con¬ 
struction  of  an  enormously  extended  canal,  taking  the  water  out  of  a 
deep  canyon  and  carrying  it  up  to  the  level  of  the  open  country,  is  a 
work  of  conservation.  It  is  a  work  of  conservation  because  the  length 
of  the  canal  itself  is  a  storage  reservoir  and  also  because  the  individual 
or  the  association  of  individuals  under  the  State  takes  up  the  work  at 
the  end  of  the  main  canal,  and  the  use  by  the  individual  completes  the 
conservation  of  water.  Now,  we  find  when  we  go  before  Congress  and 
advise  reclamation,  they  say:  “What  is  this  scheme  which  you  ask 
us  to  enter  upon?  ” 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  In  regard  to  Mr.  King’s  question,  suppose 
you  take  the  Snake  River  in  Idaho,  which  flows  through  a  deep  box 
canyon  for  a  long  distance,  so  that  it  is  practically  impossible  to  get 
it  out  of  that  canyon  to  utilize  in  irrigation,  and  suppose  the  Govern¬ 
ment,  say,  should  go  there  and  dig  and  construct  a  reservoir  there  to 
raise  the  water  to  a  point  where  it  could  be  diverted  and  used ;  that 
would  be,  under  your  idea,  properly  under  the  head  of  conservation? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  should  say  so,  and  a  national  work.  The  mem¬ 
bers  of  Congress  say  to  us,  when  we  come  before  them  in  discussion 
of  these  matters  and  ask  for  appropriations,  ‘  ‘  What  do  you  propose 
to  do,  and  how  far  do  you  ask  the  Government  to  go ;  to  what  extent 
do  you  expect  Government  expenditures  to  be  made  for  the  recla¬ 
mation  of  arid  lands?  ”  They  say  to  us  that  there  is  no  good  reason 
why  the  Government  should  actually  reclaim  lands  that  are  barren 
any  more  than  it  should  actually  drain  lands  that  are  wet,  and  their 
contention  is  sound.  There  is  no  stronger  reason  why  the  Govern¬ 
ment  should  supply  water  upon  lands,  except  as  the  lands  may  belong 
to  the  Government,  and  the  Government  can  enter  upon  the  scheme 
with  the  idea  of  disposing  of  those  lands — should  irrigate  dry  lands — 
than  that  it  should  fertilize  barren  lands.  But  when  you  say  that  it 
is  not  our  intent  and  purpose  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
shall  irrigate  the  lands,  but  that  the  Government  shall  enter  upon  the 
truly  national  work  of  making  waters  available  so  that  private  enter¬ 
prise  can  place  it  upon  the  lands,  then  to  a  very  considerable  extent 
you  eliminate  their  objection.  The  Government,  in  the  case  of  a  har¬ 
bor  which  is  absolutely  useless  and  worthless  because  of  a  bar  across 
its  mouth,  dredges  the  bar  and  makes  the  harbor  available. 

Mr.  Sutherland.  What  does  the  National  Irrigation  Congress 
believe  should  be  done  on  the  point  3^011  suggest;  do  they  not  think 
that  we  should  go  further  than  storing  the  water,  or  have  they  ex¬ 
pressed  themselves  upon  that? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  will  say  that  there  are  some  members  of  that  asso¬ 
ciation  that  think  the  Government  might  go  further,  but  .it  was  the 
consensus  of  opinion  of  that  convention  that  that  was  as  far  as  they 
could  unitedly  defend  their  proposition  to  Congress,  and  as  far  as  the 
National  Government  would  probably  ever  go,  although  there  were 
some  members  in  that  Congress  who  would  appreciate  it  if  the  Govern- 


64 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


ment  would  still  go  further.  To  illustrate  the  point  I  wish  to  make, 
in  river  and  harbor  work  the  Government  takes  a  great  stream  run¬ 
ning  through  several  States,  with  stretches  of  navigable  water,  but 
with  bars  and  shoals  between  those  stretches,  and  it  dredges  the  mouth 
of  the  river  and  the  bars  and  the  shoals  and  makes  it  available  for  the 
purpose  of  navigation  for  which  nature  intended  it.  It  does  not  make 
a  river  out  of  dry  land,  but  simply  perfects  nature’s  work.  Now,  that 
/Ts  national  work.  I  believe  it  is  likewise  a  national  work  for  the 
Government  to  perfect  the  work  of  nature  in  the  arid  regions  by  mak¬ 
ing  available  for  irrigation  every  drop  of  water  in  those  regions. 

Mr.  Newlands.  You  contend  for  that  entirely  apart  from  the  Gov¬ 
ernment’s  owership  of  the  adjoining  lands? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes,  sir;  entirely  without  an y  reference  to  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  ownership  of  the  adjoining  lands.  Of  course,  the  fact  that 
the  Government  owns  the  greater  portion  of  the  land  in  the  regions 
where  we  propose  to  conserve  this  water  is  a  very  strong  argument, 
an  exceedingly  strong  argument,  in  favor  of  this  work.  The  fact  that 
the  Government  has  550,000,000  acres  of  land  which,  under  present 
conditions  are  largely  barren,  which  can  not  be  thickly  settled,  is  the 
strongest  kind  of  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  Government  assisting 
in  making  it  possible  to  irrigate  those  of  these  lands  which  are  irri¬ 
gable  and  thus  make  all  the  lands  more  valuable.  But  beyond  that 
the  Government  owes  it  to  its  own  development,  extension  *  and  growth 
in  population  and  wealth  to  see  that  a  region  now  barren  is  made 
fruitful,  not  altogether  by  the  Government’s  expenditure,  but  largely 
bjT  the  expenditure  of  the  individual  after  the  Government  has  made 
expenditure  in  irrigation  development  possible  by  making  the  waters 
available. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Is  it  not  a  fact  in  history  that  every  nation 
having  arid  lands  in  its  domain,  except  the  United  States,  has  in  a 
national  way  aided  in  their  reclamation  in  some  way  or  other? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  think  that  is  true,  but  I  think  that  largely  the 
work  of  the  governments  has  been  work  of  the  character  I  now  refer 
to  and  not  the  actual  work  of  diversion  and  reclamation.  Now,  as  to 
cost,  we  come  before  Congress  and  they  say,  “How  much  will  it  cost, 
and  how  far  are  you  going?  ”  If  we  can  say  that  we  propose  to  enter 
upon  a  system  of  conservation  to  make  available  by  the  construction 
of  storage  reservoirs  and  the  diversion  of  large  streams  all  the  water 
that  now  runs  to  waste,  there  is  a  limit  placed,  and  a  tangible  limit 
placed,  to  the  Government’s  expenditures.  Then  they  say,  “How 
much  will  it  cost?  ”  It  is  difficult  to  say  how  much  it  will  cost,  but 
some  reasonable  estimate  can  be  made.  If  you  stop  at  storage  and 
large  stream  diversion  it  is  not  a  difficult  matter.  I  think  that  Mr. 
Newell  will  bear  me  out  that  it  is  possible  to  make  a  very  fair  guess 
as  to  what  a  comprehensive  system  of  storage  will  cost  in  the  United 
States. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  In  that  connection  it  is  estimated  that  about 
75,000,000  acres  remain  yet  to  be  irrigated.  Of  course  that  is  a  rough 
estimate,  perhaps  25,000,000  acres  one  way  or  the  other.  It  is  a  vast 
acreage,  however.  I  know  in  my  State  in  particular  a  good  many 
millions  of  acres  can  yet  be  irrigated  from  the  streams  without  any 
storage,  so  that  when  we  estimate  what  it  will  cost  in  order  to  irrigate 
75,000,000  acres  Ave  should  deduct  the  amount  that  the  streams  placed 
there  by  nature  will  yet  irrigate  before  the  necessity  arises  for  con¬ 
suming  that  which  we  Avill  provide. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  am  glad  you  mentioned  that.  To  take  the  area  in 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


65 


the  arid  regioii  susceptible  of  irrigation  as  a  basis  and  estimate  the 
cost  of  conservation  of  a  sufficient  quantity  of  water  to  irrigate  such 
an  area  is  to  place  the  cost  of  the  work  which  the  Government  should 
undertake  altogether  too  high.  Even  if  it  were  necessary  to  aid  in 
the  reclamation  of  every  acre  susceptible  of  irrigation  and  remaining 
unirrigated  in  the  arid  region  by  storage,  it  would  not  be  necessary  to 
store  a  sufficient  amount  of  water  for  their  complete  irrigation,  for  in 
all  properly  developed  systems  much  water  is  made  available  besides 
the  water  stored;  the  stored  waters  being  used  simply  to  supply  the 
deficiency  of  the  waning  stream  in  the  latter  part  of  the  crop  season. 
Then  there  are  the  large  diversions  in  which  the  work  of  the  National 
Government  should  only  extend  to  carrying  the  water  to  a  point  where 
it  will  be  available  for  distribution  by  private  enterprise.  These 
diversions  would  be  very  cheap  compared  with  the  amount  of  water 
made  available  for  irrigation  purposes. 

In  addition  to  that,  as  Mr.  Wilson  very  properly  states,  there  is  a 
considerable  area  yet  remaining  in  some  portions  of  the  arid  region 
that  may  be  developed  by  private  enterprise  without  any  Federal  aid 
either  in  diversion  or  conservation.  These  areas  are  distant  from 
lines  of  communication  and  in  regions  where  there  has  not  been  much 
demand  for  irrigated  products,  and  their  development  will  come 
slowly;  but  the  fact  that  there  are  such  areas  does  not  in  any  degree 
abate  the  necessity  for  Federal  aid  in  those  regions  where  private 
enterprise  has  now  reached  the  limit  of  irrigation  development. 

Mr.  Newlands.  And  there  is  a  great  deal  that  can  be  irrigated  by 
the  flood  water. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  There  are  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres 
irrigated  by  the  Snake  River,  and  yet  it  is  impossible  to  notice  that 
the  volume  of  that  river  has  been  decreased  to  any  appreciable  extent. 
I  imagine  there  are  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres — and  perhaps  a 
million  acres — on  that  stream  that  can  be  irrigated. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  am  speaking  of  the  question  in  a  large  way  when 
I  say  we  are  not  as  yet  to  the  limit  of  the  development  in  certain 
regions  by  State  and  private  enterprise.  In  my  State  irrigation  devel¬ 
opment  is  going  on  quite  steadily.  We  have  laws,  State  and  national, 
under  which  ordinary  diversion  and  distribution,  in  my  opinion,  can 
be  taken  care  of.  For  instance,  in  addition  to  the  laws  under  which 
small  associations  of  farmers  take  out  a  canal  from  a  small  stream 
and  irrigate  their  joint  holdings,  we  have  the  law  of  Congress  known 
as  the  Carey  Act,  which  has  been  much  misunderstood.  Under  that 
act  enterprises  can  be  undertaken  which  individuals  and  small  asso¬ 
ciations  of  farmers  could  never  undertake.  The  efficiency  of  the  act 
depends  upon  State  legislation.  In  my  State,  the  home  of  the  man 
whose  name  the  act  bears,  we  were  early  to  take  advantage  of  the  act, 
and  we  are  to-day  engaged  in  the  work  of  diverting  large  streams. 
We  have  one  enterprise  in  my  State  whereby  we  will  irrigate  85,000 
acres  of  land  and  others  in  contemplation  whereby  there  will  be  irri¬ 
gated  more  than  150,000  acres  of  land.  These  tracts  will  be  irrigated 
without  storage.1 

STATE  DESERT-LAND  SEGREGATIONS. 

By  section  4  of  the  act  of  August  18,  1894  (28  Stat.  L.,  372-422),  provision  is 
made  for  the  donation,  to  each  of  the  States  in  which  there  may  be  situated  desert 


1  Extract  from  the  Annual  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  the  General  Land 
Office  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1900: 

11196—01 - 5 


66 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


lands,  of  not  more  than  1,000,000  acres  of  such  land  as  the  Stafte  may  cause  to  be 
irrigated,  reclaimed,  occupied,  and  cultivated  by  actual  settlers.  This  act  has 
been  amended  by  a  provision  in  the  act  of  June  11,  1896  (29  Stat.  L.,  413-434),  to 
the  effect  that  a  lien  is  authorized  to  be  created  by  the  State  upon  the  lands  segre¬ 
gated,  and  that  when  an  ample  supply  of  water  is  actually  furnishSd  to  any  tract 
or  tracts  thereof  patent  shall  issue  to  the  State  for  the  same,  without  regard  to 
settlement  or  cultivation. 

During  the  year  two  lists  have  been  filed  by  the  State  of  Idaho,  one  list  by  the 
State  of  Montana,  and  one  by  the  State  of  Wyoming.  Several  lists  previously 
received  have  been  refiled  during  the  year.  All  of  these  lists  have  been  duly  acted 
upon.  One  list  filed  by  the  State  of  Idaho,  aggregating  54,005.92  acres,  was 
approved.  The  State  of  Wyoming  filed  two  lists  of  lands  for  patent,  which  have 
been  duly  acted  upon,  and  one  patent  for  3,855.25  acres  of  the  same  has  been 
issued. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Nevada  has  never  been  able  to  do  anything  under 
the  Carey  Act.  We  have  absolutely  reached  the  limit  of  diversion. 
We  divert  all  the  water  flowing  into  the  river  during  tliQ  period  of 
drought,  and  that  is  the  limit  of  cultivation.  *; 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  am  not  fully  informed  as  to  conditions  in  Nevada, 
but,  having  had  some  experience  of  the  workings  of  the  Carey  Act,  I 
believe  it  is  applicable  to  diversions  of  considerable  size  and  to  the 
distribution  of  water  over  considerable  are^s,  where  the  initial  cost  is 
entirely  beyond  private  enterprise  and  the  law  embodies  the  essential 
feature  that  lands  must  be  irrigated,  cultivated,  and  settled  in  small 
tracts. 

Mr.  Newlands.  In  Nevada  we  can  not  get  along  without  storing; 
that  is  the  essential  thing  for  any  further  reclamation. 

Mr.  Mondell.  That  merely  accentuates  the  fact  that  conditions 
vary  in  the  arid  region ;  we  also  have  reached  the  limit  of  develop¬ 
ment  without  storage  in  some  parts  of  Wyoming. 

Mr.  Barham.  It  applies  directly  to  the  proposition  you  are  going  to 
make. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes,  sir;  it  accentuates  the  fact  that  conservation  is 
a  national  work  and  ordinary  diversion  and  distribution  is  a  local 
work,  and  the  two  classes  of  enterprise  should  never  be  confused  or 
confounded.  The  United  States  Government  should  undertake  the 
one  and  the  States  and  individuals  and  associations  should  under¬ 
take  the  other. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Storage  alone  would  not  cost  more  than  half 
as  much  as  storage  and  distribution  paid  by  the  local  governments. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes;  and  I  want  to  say  that  when  you  enter  upon 
the  question  of  the  cost  of  actually  conducting  water  upon  the  lands 
and  fully  irrigating  arid  America  you  are  entering  a  calculation  that 
is  beyond  possibility  of  present  computation;  75,000,000  acres  of  land 
in  these  United  States,  now  susceptible  of  irrigation,  in  my  opinion 
will  never  be  irrigated  in  their  entirety  without  the  expenditure  of  at 
least  $20  an  acre ;  but  the  principal  portion  of  this  expenditure  will, 
of  course,  be  by  private  enterprise.  The  work  of  making  available 
for  use  by  private  enterprise  the  water  not  now  available  would  cost 
but  a  fraction  of  the  total  cost  of  the  reclamation  of  the  lands  by 
irrigation. 

The  Chairman.  Supposing  that  could  be  done  now,  at  once,  and 
75,000,000  acres  that  are  now  arid  and  nonproductive  could  be  made 
productive  by  the  expenditure  of  a  very  large  sum  of  money,  what 
would  be  the  effect  on  agricultural  products? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  will  say,  upon  that  question,  that  it  is  one  that 
opens  a  very  wide  field  for  discussion,  and  it  is  scarcely  worthy  of 
discussion,  for  the  reason  that  if  the  Government  of  the  United 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


67 


States  should  make  appropriations  of  $5,000,000  for  irrigation,  we 
could  not  use  that  amount  for  a  number  of  years,  economically. 
Reclamation  must  necessarily  be  slow,  and  through  whatever  agency 
it  comes,  it  will  never  come  as  rapidly  as  the  increasing  demand  for 
products  in  this  country  conies,  by  reason  of  the  increase  of  our 
population. 

Mr.  Newlands.  It  can  not  increase  as  rapidly  as  the  population  of 
Nebraska,  and  Kansas,  and  the  Dakotas  under  the  preemption  laws. 

Mr.  Mondell.  We  disposed  of  more  acres  of  land  under  the  pre¬ 
emption  and  homestead  laws  alone  in  twelve  years  than  the  entire 
domain  in  the  arid  regions  susceptible  of  irrigation,  and  practically 
every  acre  of  that  ground  would  produce  a  good  crop  of  wheat,  corn, 
or  cotton  by  simply  turning  it  with  a  plow.  We  extended  with  that 
rapidity  in  the  seventies  and  early  eighties.  There  is  no  possibility 
of  rapid  development  in  the  arid  regions,  no  matter  how  earnestly  we 
press  that  development,  and  no  matter  how  Federal  appropriations 
may  help  us,  there  is  no  chance  of  our  increasing  the  agricultural 
products  as  fast  as  the  demand  for  those  products  increases.  If,  then, 
this  committee  shall  decide — and  this  is  the  committee  to  make  that 
decision — the  work  which  it  shall  recommend  to  Congress  shall  be  the 
work  of  conservation  by  the  construction  of  storage  reservoirs,  by  diver¬ 
sion  when  diversion  results  in  conservation,  and  when  it  is  not  diversion 
entirely  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  waters  directly  upon  the  land — 
if  this  committee  shall  decide  that  this  is  to  be  their  recommendation 
to  Congress,  then  you  have  clearly  defined  the  scope  of  the  work  and 
limited  the  possibility  of  appropriation. 

The  Chairman.  I  will  ask  you  one  or  two  questions  on  that  point. 
Your  argument  on  that  policy  is  based  on  two  or  three  grounds.  One 
is  that  it  would  limit  the  scope  of  the  work.  Another  is  that  the  stor¬ 
age  is  a  national  and  distribution  a  local  work.  Another  still  is,  that 
the  Constitution  would  warrant  storage  without  any  distribution.  I 
do  not  understand  very  clearly  the  difference  between  the  last  two 
questions.  I  am  not  sure  that  I  know  any  distinct  provision  of  the 
Constitution  that  would  authorize  us  to  store  water  that  would  not 
authorize  to  convey  the  water  to  public  lands,  at  least. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  will  say  that  I  do  not  know  of  any  distinct  pro¬ 
vision  of  the  Constitution  which  authorizes  the  General  Government 
to  make  any  expenditure  directly  or  indirectly  to  encourage  the  irri¬ 
gation  of  the  arid  lands.  I  hope  and  believe  there  is  a  broad  power 
in  the  General  Government  to  do  it. 

Mr.  Barham.  It  can  be  done  under  the  general-welfare  clause. 

The  Chairman.  Yes;  the  provision  that  Congress  shall  pass  all 
needful  regulations  for  the  government  of  the  Territories  and  other 
“property”  of  the  United  States.  But  I  am  not  able  to  see  the  dis¬ 
tinction  between  storing  water  and  conveying  it  onto  the  lands  where 
it  is  to  be  used.  It  must  come  under  the  general  power  of  the  United 
States,  unless  it  comes  under  the  general  welfare,  but  I  am  not  able 
to  see  the  difference  between  storing  the  water  and  conveying  it  down 
through  canals  to  the  lands. 

Mr.  Mondell.  There  is  a  vast  difference,  in  my  opinion. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Considering  the  constitutional  question,  I  think 
we  all  agree  that  throughout  the  arid  region  the  duty  of  the  Govern¬ 
ment  is  discharged  when  it  conserves  the  waters  and  leaves  the  dis¬ 
tribution  to  local  individuals. 

Mr.  Mondell.  In  speaking  from  a  constitutional  standpoint,  and 
speaking  of  the  general  policy,  I  think  there  is  a'  wide  difference — as 


68 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


wide  as  the  poles.  The  conservation  of  the  waters  makes  available 
for  use  all  lands  which  nature  so  placed  that  they  can  be  irrigated 
from  a  stream ;  makes  possible  the  use  of  all  the  waters  nature  has 
provided  for  the  irrigation  of  that  land.  The  distribution  of  water, 
on  the  other  hand,  makes  the  water  appurtenant  to  certain  specific 
lands.  The  first  class  of  work  can  only  be  carried  out  successfully 
through  public  agencies,  and  as  it  must  be  accomplished  in  order  to  make 
vast  areas  of  our  country  habitable  by  any  considerable  population, 
the  Government  should  undertake  it  in  the  interest  of  the  general  wel¬ 
fare.  It  does  not  interfere  in  any  way  with  any  law,  rule,  or  regula¬ 
tion  of  the  States  relative  to  the  use  of  water. 

The  second  class  of  work  can  be  accomplished  in  most  instances  by 
private  enterprise,  and  that  puts  it  out  of  the  category  of  public 
enterprise,  if  nothing  else  does.  In  the  first  instance,  the  National 
Government  makes  available  the  waters  of  the  arid  region  as  it 
makes  available  the  navigable  waters  of  the  humid  region,  and  in 
doing  so  it  does  not  interfere  with  individual  enterprise  in  any  partic¬ 
ular,  or  enter  into  conflict  with  laws  or^regulations  of  the  States.  But 
if  you  enter  upon  a  plan  of  distribution  of  water  by  the  General  Gov¬ 
ernment  and  actual  irrigation  of  specific  lands,  you  do  threaten 
national  conflict  with  State  water  laws  and  discredit  individual  enter¬ 
prise  which  is  engaged  in  the  business  of  irrigation  of  lands.  If  the 
Government  proposed  to  divert  ordinary  streams  and  carry  them 
upon  lands  and  enter  into  the  business  of  selling  the  waters,  you  imme¬ 
diately  invite  conflict  with  State  laws,  put  a  damper  upon  every  cor¬ 
poration  and  individual  or  association  of  farmers,  because  they  hang 
back,  hoping  that  the  Government  will  take  up  their  particular  plan, 
/  or  fearful  that  the  Government  will  take  up  their  particular  plan.  It 
will  retard  the  development  of  the  arid  lands,  instead  of  encouraging 
development  in  the  arid  region,  for  the  Government  to  enter  upon  the 
purely  paternalistic  work  of  distributing  water  and  irrigating  specific 
glands. 

Mr.  Barham.  Charging  a  rental? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes,  sir;  charging  a  rental. 

The  Chairman.  Evidently  I  have  succeeded  in  misunderstanding, 
or  being  misunderstood  by,  the  gentleman  from  Wyoming.  I  would 
say  that  I  see  the  advantage  of  the  policy  you  advocate  in  regard  to 
the  storage.  But  I  am  inclined  to  think  you  weaken  your  argument 
by  bringing  in  the  second  point  in  regard  to  the  Constitution,  and  I 
wanted  to  bring  you  out  on  that  point. 

Mr.  Mondell.  As  a  layman  I  should  not  have  referred  to  the  Con¬ 
stitution  in  the  presence  of  constitutional  lawyers,  and  so  I  beg  pardon 
for  having  done  so. 

The  Chairman.  On  the  question  of  public  policy,  I  have  been  very 
much  interested  in  vour  argument. 

Mr.  Newlands.  You  favor  the  storage  of  water  by  the  Government? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Newlands.  And  vour  scheme  of  conservation  does  not  consist, 
then,  of  mere!}7  impounding  the  waters,  but  also  in  carrying  the  waters 
to  the  point  where  private  enterprise  can  commence,  leaving  distri¬ 
bution  and  reclamation  to  the  enterprise  of  corporations  and  private 
individuals. 

Mr.  Mondell.  My  idea  is  that  the  line  which  should  be  drawn  is 
where  the  work  of  making  water  available  for  use  in  irrigation  ends 
and  actual  utilization  of  such  water  for  the  irrigation  of  specific  tracts 
begins.  Where  the  enterprise  is  beyond  all  possibility  of  individual 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


69 


construction  and  diversion  results  practically  in  conservation,  then  it 
is  a  part  of  a  conservation  scheme. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Now,  as  to  the  appropriations,  it  is  your  contention 
that  an  appropriation  should  be  made  just  as  river  and  harbor  appro¬ 
priations  should  be  made — without  any  view  to  compensation  to  the 
Government  directly  for  the  work  done ;  is  that  so? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  was  just  coming  to  that  point,  and  I  will  answer 
the  question  now.  I  am  glad  you  referred  to  it.  My  individual  opin¬ 
ion,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  that  the  Government  should  never  expect  a  dol¬ 
lar’s  return  for  its  expenditures  in  the  conservation  of  the  flood  waters 
of  the  country,  any  more  than  it  now  exjiects  a  return  for  the  con¬ 
servation  of  waters  in  the  protection  of  the  forests  in  forest  reserves, 
any  more  than  it  expects  a  return,  although  it  makes  enormously 
valuable  the  property  of  individuals,  for  dredging  out  rivers  and 
harbors;  that  this  work  should  be  undertaken  purely  as  a  national 
work  for  the  development  of  the  country.  It  does  not  make  it  a  penny 
cheaper  or  easier  to  develop  an  arid  waste  to  have  the  Government 
conserve  the  waters  that  now  run  to  waste;  it  simply  makes  it  possible 
for  private  enterprise  to  do  so  to  utilize  all  the  water  which  the 
Almighty  has  placed  in  the  arid  region.  However,  if  it  shall  be  the 
opinion  of  the  committee  and  of  the  Congress  when  they  enter  upon 
this  work  that  the  Government  should  in  some  instances — because 
the  conditions  vary  very  greatly;  the  conditions  of  Nevada  are  very 
different  from  those  in  Wyoming — if  it  be  the  opinion  of  Congress 
that  the  Government  should  be  partly  or  wholly  reimbursed,  then  we 
come  to  the  question  of  the  method  of  reimbursement.  In  enterprises 
of  conservation  it  is  difficult  to  fix  the  charges  as  you  could  fix  them 
if  you  were  undertaking  simply  a  work  of  distribution.  Reservoirs, 
it  has  been  demonstrated  by  practice  (and  I  think  common  sense  would 
also  lead  us  to  that  conclusion)  should  be  used  as  works  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  maintaining  a  uniform  flow  of  water  in  a  stream  throughout  the 
irrigation  season.  It  is  difficult  to  say  just  what  effect  the  storage  of 
water  has  on  specific  tracts  along  the  stream.  It  depends  largety  on 
the  character  of  the  country  through  which  the  stream  flows,  so  that 
an  attempt  to  attach  water  stored  at  the  head  of  a  perennial  stream 
to  a  specific  tract  of  land  is  not  practicable,  and  it  is  not  scientific, 
for  the  reason  that  any  storage  project  not  only  makes  available 
the  water  stored,  but  makes  available  an  infinitely  greater  volume  of 
water  which  is  not  stored.  Here  are  some  plats  illustrating  the  flow 
of  streams,  prepared  by  Mr.  Newell.  This  illustrates  the  flow  of  the 
stream.  We  will  say  that  the  irrigation  season  begins  in  May — just 
an  illustration;  it  ends  in  August;  now  the  amount  of  water  available 
in  that  stream  under  jiresent  conditions  is  the  minimum  flow  at  the 
last  of  the  irrigation  season.  All  of  the  enormous  volume  occuring  in 
the  earlier  floods  runs  to  waste,  because  only  the  amount  of  water  can 
be  successfully  used  which  flows  during  the  entire  irrigation  season. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  That  is  subject  to  the  exception  of  spring 
crops. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes;  but  I  am  speaking  in  a  large  way.  There  are 
regions  where  we  simply  flood  grass  lands  in  the  spring  and  get  a  fair 
crop.  That  is  but  a  poor  irrigation  at  the  best. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Yes;  but  in  regard  to  the  fruit  crop? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes;  that  is  an  exception.  Now  it  is  simply  neces¬ 
sary  to  reservoir  a  sufficient  quantity  of  water  at  the  head  of  a  stream 
to  reenforce  the  waning  flow,  and  for  every  acre-foot  of  water  you  con¬ 
serve  from  1  to  2  acre-feet  is  made  available  in  addition. 


70 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Newlands.  I  quite  agree  with  you  that  the  effort  should  be  to 
keep  an  equal  and  sustained  flow  in  the  river,  and  that  it  is  not  desir¬ 
able  for  the  Government  to  go  into  the  system  of  distribution.  How 
would  you  get  compensation? 

Mr.  Mondell.  If  there  is  to  be  a  return  of  the  expenditure  it  seems 
to  me  that  while  some  return  might  be  had  from  public  lands  bene¬ 
fited,  the  major  part  of  the  expenditure,  if  returned,  should  be  secured 
from  water  benefits. 

Mr.  Newlands.  You  would  fix  that  charge  upon  the  land  or  the 
ditches? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Upon  those  using  the  waters  made  available  for  use 
b}^  the  Government  expenditure. 

Mr.  Newlands.  How  would  you  measure  it? 

Mr.  Mondell.  As  you  ordinarily  measure  water,  by  cubic  feet  per 
second. 

Mr.  Newlands.  You  would  make  that  charge  so  as  to  fully  com¬ 
pensate  in  a  period  of  years,  or  make  it  a  peipetual  water  right? 

Mr.  Mondell.  If  it  is  thought  that  the  Government  should  be  reim¬ 
bursed,  then,  of  course,  the  amount  charged  against  the  users  should 
be  proportionate  to  the  amount  used.  It  would  be  a  mistake  to  make 
it  a  perpetual  charge,  because  if  there  is  any  one  thing  that  I  am  not 
in  favor  of,  it  is  a  perpetual  charge  for  water  by  anybody — the  Gov¬ 
ernment,  a  State,  or  companies.  That,  of  course,  is  only  a  personal 
view;  the  right  should  be  perpetual. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Of  the  ways  in  which  the  Government  can  get  com¬ 
pensation,  one  is  to  increase  the  price  for  the  land  while  under  recla¬ 
mation  through  storage;  another  is  through  a  sale  of  water  rights, 
and  a  third  is  a  sale  of  the  water  itself,  measuring  it  in  cubic  feet. 

Mr.  Mondell.  If  it  is  to  be  a  sale  of  water  rights,  the  right  should 
be  expressed  in  cubic  feet. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Which  one  do  you  recommend? 

Mr.  Mondell.  The  first  plan  would  only  be  possible  on  a  fair  basis 
where  all  the  lands  to  be  benefited  by  projects  were  Government 
lands.  I  do  not  see  how  you  can  possibly  arrive  at  it.  It  is  a  bad 
theory  and  impossible  in  practice. 

Mr.  Barham.  The  first  is  what? 

Mr.  Mondell.  As  I  understand  it,  the  placing  of  a  charge  upon  the 
Government  land  under  a  project  high  enough  to  get  back  the  money 
expended. 

Mr.  Newlands.  No;  with  a  view  to  determining  what  amount  of 
land  can  be  brought  under  reclamation,  and  having  ascertained  the 
total  amount,  say  50,000  acres,  fixing  such  a  price  per  acre  as  will 
give  you  a  compensation  in  ten  or  twenty  years. 

Mr.  Mondell.  We  must  remember  that  on  many  of  the  streams  of 
the  country  more  than  the  present  average  flow  during  the  irrigation 
season  has  already  been  appropriated,  and  if  we  increase  the  average 
flow  the  increase  will  not  all  be  used  to  irrigate  public  lands,  but  will 
be,  to  some  extent,  used  to  irrigate  land  in  private  ownership;  and 
therefore  it  would  seem  that  the  return  should  come  from  those  bene¬ 
fited,  whether  using  the  waters  to  irrigate  lands  newly  taken  up 
under  the  land  laws  or  the  lands  already  in  private  control.  Now,  if 
the  Government  built  reservoirs  with  a  view  to  irrigating  only  new 
lands  on  a  stream  where  there  are  now  lands  under  private  control 
partly  irrigated,  what  would  be  the  effect  on  the  people  whose  lands 
are  already  under  irrigation  and  who  do  not  have  enough  water  now? 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  am  not  contending  now  that  these  waters  should 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


71 


be  applied  to  particular  lands.  I  am  suggesting  bow  the  Government 
shall  receive  compensation  for  the  sum  expended  in  storage,  when¬ 
ever  it  can  ascertain  the  additional  number  of  acres  which  can  be 
reclaimed,  and  put  such  a  price  on  that  land  as  will  compensate  the 
Government.  Assuming  that  the  Government  is  to  be  compensated, 
would  you  prefer  that  the  land  price  should  be  raised,  or  that  the 
compensation  should  be  received  from  the  actual  sale  of  the  water 
itself? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  would  say,  that  except  under  projects  where  there 
is  no  preseilt  irrigation  on  the  stream  or  land  in  private  ownership, 
except  in  such  a  case  it  would  be  impossible  to  settle  upon  a  scheme 
of  land  values  that  would  be  just  as  a  basis  of  reimbursement;  if  the 
Government  is  to  be  reimbursed,  it  seems  to  me  it  must  be  by  a  charge 
for  water  rights. 

Mr.  Barham.  What  kind  of  a  bill  do  you  think  it  would  be  best  to 

/e? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  hope  we  may  be  able  to  secure  a  direct  appropri¬ 
ation  with  which  to  begin  the  construction  of  at  least  one  project.  It 
seems  that  Congress  is  willing  to  give  us  thousands  for  investigation, 
but  not  a  dollar  for  construction.  It  is  against  this  policy  of  Congress 
that  I  chafe.  If  we  can  not  secure  consideration  for  a  comprehensive 
plan,  let  us  insist  upon  some  provision  being  attached  to  the  river  and 
harbor  appropriation  which  will  give  us  a  start.  We  have  the  proj¬ 
ects  in  Colorado  and  Wyoming,  which  have  been  carefully  surveyed 
and  estimated  by  the  War  Department. 

Mr.  King.  Could  you  give  us  the  status  of  the  Gila  River  propo¬ 
sition? 

Mr.  Mondell.  That  is  a  proposition  on  which  we  may  have  an 
opportunity  to  vote  later,  and  my  only  regret  in  connection  with  it  is 
that  instead  of  providing  $100,000  for  a  further  survey  it  does  not 
appropriate  $100,000  to  survey  and  construct.  We  are  constantly 
being  asked,  “  How  far  are  you  going,  and  what  do  you  intend  to  do?  ” 
To  meet  that  query  I  have  introduced  a  bill  (H.  R.  13847)  which 
simply  provides  that  the  Geological  Survey  (I  admit  that  I  think  we 
have  had  plenty  of  surveys  to  begin  with,  but  Congress  does  not  agree 
with  us  in  that  direction) — that  the  Geological  Survey  shall  proceed  to 
make  an  investigation  of  the  entire  question  of  water  conservation 
throughout  the  arid  region,  with  detailed  investigation  and  survey 
and  estimate  of  a  project  in  each  one  of  the  arid  and  semiarid  States; 
and  if  there  is  a  locality  where  the  Geological  Survey  thinks  irriga¬ 
tion  can  better  be  accomplished  by  artesian  wells  than  by  storage,  I 
should  recommend  that  they  ascertain  the  limits  of  the  artesian  basins, 
and  report  fully  to  the  next  Congress  on  these  matters  so  we  may  have 
a  basis  for  future  legislation. 

(Thereupon  the  committee  adjourned,  to  meet  on  Thursday,  Febru¬ 
ary  7,  at  10  o’clock  a.  m.) 


Washington,  D.  C.,  February  7,  1901. 

The  committee  met  at  10.15  o’clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  Thomas  II.  Tongue 
in  the  chair. 

Present,  in  addition  to  the  members  of  the  committee,  Hon.  Francis 
G.  Newlands,  of  Nevada;  Hon.  J.  F.  Wilson,  of  Arizona;  Elwood  Mead, 
irrigation  expert  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  F.  II.  Newell, 
hydrographer  of  the  Geological  Survey;  George  H.  Maxwell,  chairman 


72 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


of  tlie  executive  committee  of  the  National  Irrigation  Association,  and 
Gifford  Pinchot,  chief  forester  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture. 

Mr.  Newlakds.  I  suggest  that  Mr.  Pinchot  make  a  statement  regard¬ 
ing  forest  preservation  as  an  essential  part  of  anj^  scheme  of  arid-land 
reclamation. 

STATEMENT  OF  GIFFORD  PINCHOT,  CHIEF  FORESTER  OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES  DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE. 

Mr.  Chairman,  the  essential  thing  I  want  to  say  is  that  the  policy  of 
conserving  water  for  irrigation  by  the  Government  wras  begun  in  the 
act  of  March  3,  1891,  which  directed  the  President  of  the  United  States 
to  reserve  lands  in  whole  or  in  part  covered  with  timber.  The  forest- 
reservation  policy  thus  inaugurated  was  carriect  out,  first,  by  President 
Harrison,  who  made  some  13,000,000  acres  of  forest  reservations,  fol¬ 
lowed  by  President  Cleveland,  who  made  some  27,000,000  acres  of 
forest  reservations,  and  has  been  continued  by  President  McKinley 
since;  so  that  the  total  area  now  within  forest-reservation  boundaries 
is  about  47,000,000  acres.  These  reservations  were  made  for  two  pur¬ 
poses,  the  chief  of  which  at  present  is  the  conservation  of  water  and 
the  other  the  perpetuation  of  the  supply  of  wood.  The  Federal  Gov¬ 
ernment  makes  an  appropriation  of  $300,000  a  year,  expended  through 
the  General  Land  Office,  for  the  protection  of  these  forests,  for  these 
two  purposes,  and  a  second  appropriation  of  $150,000  a  year,  expended 
through  the  Geological  Survey,  for  the  survey,  mapping,  and  descrip¬ 
tion  of  these  reserves,  also  with  the  ultimate  view  of  protecting  them; 
and  a  third  appropriation,  of  $88,520,  expended  through  the  Depart¬ 
ment  of  Agriculture,  a  portion  of  which  is  also  devoted  to  the  study 
of  these  reserves  for  the  same  purpose.  Consequently,  in  forest  mat¬ 
ters  the  policy  of  the  United  States  to  expend  money  for  the  protection 
of  irrigation  is  well  fixed.  A  forest  is  essentially  a  storage  reservoir, 
and  consequently  the  policy  of  Government  storage  reservoirs  is  not  a 
new  one. 

Mr.  Barham.  The  Government  pays  out  now  nearly  $500,000  a  year 
for  the  protection  of  forests  which  are  storage  reservoirs;  is  that  the 
substance  of  the  statement? 

Mr.  Pinchot.  Yes;  for  the  protection  of  storage  reservoirs  in  the 
West. 

Mr.  Barham.  If  you  allow  me  to  suggest  it,  it  seems  to  me  that  your 
statement  up  to  this  time  will  not  be  very  clear  to  people  who  do  not 
understand  what  you  are  talking  about.  “Forest  reserves,”  “Con¬ 
servation  of  the  water  for  irrigation” — now,  they  do  not  know  what 
you  are  talking  about.  Can  not  you  explain  that  so  when  a  man  reads 
your  statement  he  will  know  what  you  are  talking  about?  We  our 
selves  know  exactly  what  it  means;  but  I  can  give  a  number  of  illus¬ 
trations,  and  you  can,  undoubtedly,  give  many  others  of  the  importance 
of  the  preservation  of  the  forests  and  what  that  amounts  to  in  con¬ 
serving  water. 

Mr.  Pinchot.  The  protection  which  forests  offer  against  evapora¬ 
tion  by  their  shade,  by  breaking  the  wind,  and  by  their  creation  and 
protection  of  a  soil  cover,  makes  them  natural  storage  reservoirs  for 
water. 

The  crowns  of  the  trees  shade  the  ground  from  the  sun  and  wind. 
They  also  form  the  forest  floor  with  their  litter  of  leaves  and  twigs, 
and  this  mass  of  decaying  tree  refuse  is  the  most  important  element 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


73 


in  retarding  evaporation  and  surface  flow.  This  vegetable  mold  pre¬ 
vents  whatever  sun  and  wind  that  pass  the  tops  of  the  trees  from 
reaching  the  soil,  besides  being  of  a  very  spongy  nature  itself. 

When  rain  falls  upon  a  forested  area,  a  great  deal  of  it  is  caught  by 
the  leaves  on  the  trees  and  held  for  a  time  before  it  reaches  the  soil. 
The  ground  litter  also  keeps  some  of  the  water  in  it  for  periods  which 
depend  upon  its  depth  and  quality.  When  there  is  so  much  rain  that 
the  soil  is  too  wet  to  absorb  more,  the  obstruction  which  the  trunks  of 
the  trees  and  the  forest  litter  offer  has  considerable  influence  in  keep¬ 
ing  the  water  from  at  once  rushing  off  into  the  streams. 

The  destruction  of  the  forest  removes  the  source  of  the  litter. 
Without  tree  tops  or  ground  cover  to  intercept  the  drops,  rain  soon 
pounds  the  upper  soil  into  a  compact  mass  which  water  can  not  pene¬ 
trate  easily,  thus  forcing  it  to  flow  awaj^  over  the  surface  at  once. 
There  is  also  no  longer  the  obstruction  to  this  surface  flow  which  the 
tree  trunks  and  litter  of  leaves  and  twigs  formerly  afforded.  The 
result  is  that  the  water  which  falls  upon  the  denuded  land  has  nothing 
to  prevent  it  from  flowing  right  away.  In  its  downward  course  it 
washes  the  land  and  carries  much  soil  away  with  it  to  be  deposited  on 
the  level,  lower  land  below.  In  the  high  altitudes  where  snow  gathers 
the  influence  of  the  forest  is  both  in  shading  the  snow  from  the  sun 
and  wind  and  in  keeping  it  from  sliding  down  into  streams. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  preservation  of  the  forests, 
not  only  of  the  trees  but  the  protection  of  the  surface  of  the  soil  by 
the  undergrowth  and  grass  and  everything  which  is  a  part  of  the  for¬ 
est  growth,  is  very  necessary  to  prevent  the  washing  of  debris  in  the 
reservoirs? 

Mr.  Pinchot.  It  is  essential.  Not  only  is  the  forest  a  storage  reservoir 
itself  for  the  distribution  of  water,  the  conservation  of  the  supply,  but 
also  it  acts  by  its  numerous  roots  and  protecting  cover  as  a  blanket  for 
the  loose  soil  holding  it  from  being  washed  into  the  streams  and  caught 
in  the  reservoirs.  No  svstem  of  storage  reservoirs  built  on  anv  water- 
sheds  not  controlled  by  forest  can  be  permanent.  The  chief  danger 
to  any  storage-reservoir  system  is  that  the  reservoir  itself  will  be  filled 
up  with  silt.  This  is  not  a  theoretical  statement;  it  is  based  on  a 
large  number  of  known  cases  in  which  very  expensive  irrigation 
works  have  been  entirely  ruined  by  the  deposit  of  .silt,  and  the  only 
known  means  of  protection  against  that  is  the  maintenance  of  forest 
on  the  watersheds.  Forest  destruction  above  storage  reservoirs  is 
uniformly  followed  by  serious  damage  or  destruction  of  the  reservoirs 
themselves. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Your  idea  is  that  the  preservation  of  the  forest  is 
a  preventive? 

Mr.  Pinch.ot.  Exactly.  Forest  destruction  causes  silting,  and  for¬ 
est  preservation  stops  it.  Danger  from  that  source  can  be  obviated 
by  a  proper  system  of  forests,  and  that  is  the  only  way  in  which  it 
can  be  obviated. 

Mr.  Barham.  Can  not  you  put  that  in  a  little  plainer  way?  Now, 
by  way  of  illustration,  take  a  place  where  a  forest  has  been  cut  off. 
When  the  waters  fall,  a£  they  do  in  our  section  of  the  country,  the 
water  coming  down  in  torrential  streams — and  I  suppose  in  almost  all 
the  arid  regions  they  are  torrential  streams — that  forest  being  all  gone 
and  the  underbrush  being  gone,  the  accumulation  of  loose  dirt,  rocks, 
and  stone  and  debris  from  the  destruction  of  the  timber,  and  all  that 
kind  of  thing,  goes  down  into  the  reservoir  that  you  have  built.  I 
know  in  California  the  great  canyons  have  been  filled  up;  they  will 


74 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


mine  on  either  side  of  these  canj^ons  and  on  the  little  streams  that 
run  into  these  canyons.  They  will  fill  up  30  or  50  or  100  or  300  feet 
deep.  Now,  when  the  torrential  storm  comes  on  the  whole  thing,  150 
or  200  feet  deep,  is  swept  out  as  clean  as  it  could  he  and  carried  into 
the  navigable  river  below  or  upon  the  farms  below.  It  would  be  pre¬ 
cisely  the  same,  it  seems  to  me,  with  a  reservoir,  if  you  do  not  have  the 
underbrush  or  the  trees  or  forests  to  prevent  this  silt  coming  down — 
this  debris,  this  sand,  and  dirt  coming  down — and  the  first  thing  you 
would  know  you  would  not  have  any  reservoir,  or  rather  a  reservoir 
of  sand  and  dirt  and  pebbles  and  rocks  and  stumps  and  logs  and 
everything  that  is  loose  which  would  go  down  into  that  and  fill  up  the 
reservoir.  * 

Mr.  Pinchot.  Precisely.  Your  reservoir  would  no  longer  hold 
water.  I  am  familiar  with  one  that  filled  up  so  completely  that  a 
canal  had  to  be  dug  through  it. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  remember  an  incident  as  to  some  forest  in  the 
mountains  of  southern  California  where  the  ashes  and  silt  from  the 
fire  came  down  and  left  great  banks  of  it. 

Mr.  Pinchot.  A  more  recent  fire  in  southern  California  gives  a  still 
better  illustration.  There  are  two  canyons,  side  by  side,  in  the  San 
Jacinto  Forest  Reserve,  one  of  which  was  burned  out.  The  area  was 
as  1  to  29.  The  smaller  one  was  burned  out.  A  heavy  storm  occurred 
after  the  fire,  and  immediately  after  the  storm  the  canyon  whose  area 
was  one  was  discharging  more  water  than  the  canyon  "whose  drainage 
area  was  twenty-nine  times  as  great. 

Mr.  Barham.  Judge  Wilson,  of  Arizona,  is  here  and  desires  to  be 
heard  along  the  same  line.  He  has  only  a  few  remarks  to  make,  I 
understand,  and  then  will  extend  his  remarks  in  the  record. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  J.  F.  WILSON,  DELEGATE  FROM  ARIZONA. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Arizona.  I  simjfiy  want  to  get  the  points  wdiich  my 
bill  brings  out  before  you. 

Mr.  Barham.  How  long  would  it  take  you  to  do  that? 

Mr.  Wilson.  I  suppose  about  twenty  minutes — it  may  be  longer. 
I  will  be  brief  as  possible,  however.  The  bill  concerning  which  I  wish 
to  speak  is  as  follows: 

LH.  R.  3733.  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  first  session.] 

A  BILL  to  authorize  the  construction  of  a  reservoir  near  San  Carlos,  Arizona,  to  provide 
water  for  irrigating  Sacaton  Reservation,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Whereas  the  Indians  located  upon  the  Sacaton  Reservation  have,  since  time  imme¬ 
morial,  supported  themselves  by  agriculture  through  utilizing  for  irrigation 
the  waters  of  Gila  River;  and 

Whereas  these  Indians  have  at  all  times  been  friends  of  the  whites  as  against  the 
attacks  of  the  Apaches,  and  through  this  fact  the  whites  have  been  encouraged 
to  settle  near  the  reservation  and  utilize  the  waters  of  Gila  River;  and 
Whereas  the  development  of  irrigation  along  Gila  River  consequent  upon  the  set¬ 
tlement  of  the  public  lands  has  diminished  the  flow  in  that  stream  until  the 
Indians  have  been  deprived  of  water  and  are  forced  to  become  dependent  upon 
the  charity  of  the  Government  for  food;  and 
Whereas  this  deplorable  condition  has  existed  for  a  number  of  years  and  has  been 
called  to  the  attention  of  the  Indian  Office  from  time  to  time,  and  as  a  result 
investigations  have  been  made,  a  preliminary  report  being  published  in  Senate 
Document  Numbered  Twenty-seven,  Fifty-fourth  Congress,  second  session; 
and  also  in  Water-Supply  and  Irrigation  Paper  Numbered  Thirty-three  of  the 
United  States  Geological  Survey;  and 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


75 


Whereas  the  result  of  these  investigations  shows  that  water  can  be  obtained  in  an 
economical  manner  only  by  means  of  storage  reservoirs;  and 
Whereas  suitable  locations  for  these  have  been  found  at  a  number  of  places — 
notably  at  The  Buttes,  Riverside,  San  Carlos,  and  Guthrie,  and  also  on  Queen 
Creek— and  an  examination  of  all  these,  and  comparison  of  costs  and  benefits, 
shows  that  the  San  Carlos  location  is  to  be  preferred;  and 
Whereas  the  conclusions  of  the  engineers  and  experts  employed  in  the  investiga¬ 
tion  are  that  a  masonry  dam  can  be  built  at  San  Carlos,  forming  a  reservoir 
of  two  hundred  and  forty  thousand  acre-feet  capacity,  and  that  the  water  sup¬ 
ply  is  ample  to  fill  such  a  reservoir  in  years  of  minimum  flow,  and  that  the 
volume  of  storage  will  irrigate  at  least  one  hundred  thousand  acres  in  addi¬ 
tion  to  the  irrigation  of  the  lands  of  the  Indians;  also  that  it  is  feasible  to 
increase  the  height  at  least  seventy  feet,  forming  a  reservoir  whose  ultimate 
capacity  would  be  approximately  five  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  acre-feet; 
and 

WTiereas  by  the  construction  of  such  a  dam  a  portion  of  the  lands  on  the  San  Car¬ 
los  Reservation  will  be  flooded:  Therefore, 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of 
America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  be,  and  he  is 
hereby,  authorized  and  directed  to  take  the  necessary  steps  to  secure  title  to  the 
Government  for  the  lands  to  be  flooded  or  needed  for  the  purpose  of  reservoir 
construction  and  for  line  of  canal  from  the  reservoir  or  reservoirs,  and  that  any 
lands  now  the  property  of  the  United  States  needed  for  this  purpose,  or  the  value 
of  which  is  affected,  be  segregated  and  removed  from  entry  and  settlement. 

Sec.  2.  That  for  the  purpose  of  sounding  for  bed  rock  at  the  foundations  of  the 
proposed  San  Carlos  dam,  for  preparing  detailed  plans  and  estimates,  and  for 
beginning  the  construction  of  foundations  and  the  completion  of  said  dam  or  dams, 
the  sum  of  one  million  dollars  be  appropriated,  to  be  expended  under  the  direction 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior;  and  that  the  said  work  shall  begin  as  early  as 
possible,  and  shall  be  prosecuted  to  completion  without  delay. 

Sec.  3.  That  this  act  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from  and  after  its  passage. 

This  question  lias  been  before  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid 
Lands  for  nearly  two  years.  Hearings  upon  top  of  hearings  have 
been  had  by  this  committee,  with  a  view  of  obtaining  complete  knowl¬ 
edge  of  the  facts  back  of  the  proposition  that  the  dam  should  be 
built.  After  exhausting  the  testimony  on  the  subject  and  an  inves¬ 
tigation  of  all  the  facts,  the  committee  has  reached  the  conclusion 
which  is  formulated  in  the  report,  which  I  will  now  read: 

REPORT  BY  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS  ON 
THE  PROPOSED  DAM  ON  GILA  RIVER.  ARIZONA. 

Your  committee  find  that  the  Indians  known  as  the  Pima  Indians  are  located  on 
the  Sacaton  Indian  Reservation,  on  the  Gila  River,  in  the  Territory  of  Arizona, 
some  20  miles  beiow  Florence,  in  Pinal  County.  They  and  other  Indians  with 
them,  mainly  dependent  upon  the  products  of  the  soil  coming  from  that  reserva¬ 
tion,  are  in  number  about  8,000.  These  Indians  from  time  immemorial  have 
occupied  this  particular  section  now  known  as  the  Sacaton  Reservation,  which 
contains  about  50,000  acres  of  land,  30,000  of  which  is  the  most  productive  soil  of 
the  valley,  and  have  supported  themselves  by  agriculture  by  utilizing  for  irriga¬ 
tion  the  waters  of  Gila  River.  They  have  always  been  the  friends  of  the  Ameri¬ 
can  people,  and  at  times,  when  the  savage  warrior  made  it  dangerous  for  the 
Americans  and  pioneers  in  that  country  to  be  there  at  all,  because  of  their 
cruel  warfare,  they  became  the  defender  of  the  white  man  against  the  fierce 
Apache,  and  their  reservation  was  a  safe  retreat  for  him;  and  now  their  chief 
boast  is  that  not  one  of  their  tribe  has  ever  stained  his  hands  in  white  man’s 
blood. 

As  civilization  progressed  and  that  country  became  settled,  the  lands  of  the  Gila 
River  have  been  taken  up  by  the  white  settlers  above  this  reservation,  who  bought 
them  from  the  Government,  which  lands  carried  water  rights,  etc.,  and  they  have 
appropriated  the  waters  of  the  river  as  they  flow  naturally  down  the  stream,  until 
now  these  Indians  have  not  sufficient  water  to  irrigate  exceeding  from  1,000  to 
2,000  acres  of  their  land  in  the  dry  seasons.  With  sufficient  water,  which  they 
crave  so  much,  to  irrigate  the  lands  which  they  desire  to  put  into  cultivation  and 
to  till,  these  Indians  would  be  able  to  cultivate  and  raise  products  of  the  soil  suf¬ 
ficient  to  pay  all  of  the  expenses  to  which  the  Government  has  been  put  on  their 


76 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


account,  and  to  create  a  sinking  fund  in  the  Treasury  besides.  In  other  words, 
it  would  take  them  off  the  expense  list  entirely,  and  that  is  great. 

And  if  the  Government  has  the  right  to  convey  these  lands  to  the 
white  settlers,  who  take  them  up  and  make  them  homes  for  the  people, 
it  lias  the  right  also  as  guardian  of  these  Indians  to  make  the  lands 
sufficiently  productive  to  take  the  Indians  off  the  expense  list  of  the 
Government,  which  now  costs  about  $70,000  a  year. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  now  has  appropriated  through  Congress 
$30,000  for  their  maintenance,  simply  to  feed  them,  while  the  other  expenses  which 
the  Government  must  bear  on  their  accoifnt  amounts  to  about  $39,000  a  year, 
making  the  expense  about  $70,000  every  year  that  the  Government  must  bear  on 
account  of  these  Indians,  all  of  which  would  be  avoided  if  this  dam  should  be 
erected  and  the  reservoir  constructed  as  provided  in  the  bill. 

That  it  is  practical  and  would  be  profitable  to  the  Government  to  build  this  dam 
seems  to  have  been  established  by  the  Government’s  experts  who  have  investi¬ 
gated  the  facts  concerning  it.  The  preliminary  report  published  in  Senate  Doc. 
No.  27,  Fifty-fourth  Congress,  second  session,  and  also  in  Water-Supply  and  Irri¬ 
gation  Paper  No.  33.  lately  published  by  the  Geological  Survey,  show  plainly  and 
conclusively  that  it  is  practical  and  that  it  would  be  profitable  to  build  this  dam, 
and  that  it  should  be  built  and  this  reservoir  constructed. 

Your  committee  also  find  it  to  be  an  established  fact  that  the  dam  when  built 
to  the  height  of  150  feet,  which  it  may  be,  will  hold  when  full  247,000  acre-feet,  or 
water  enough  to  cover  that  number  of  acres  a  foot  deep.  If  raised  70  feet  higher, 
which  it  may  be.  it  would  contain  550,000  acre-feet. 

This  outlay  will  cost  a  little  less  than  $1,000,000,  or  not  exceed  that  amount, 
the  amount  carried  in  this  bill.  When  completed  there  will  be  water  enough 
saved  for  distribution,  on  an  econpmic  basis,  in  the  dry  season  when  water  is 
needed,  that  could  not  be  obtained  from  the  stream,  to  irrigate  the  30,000  acres  of 
easy  irrigable  lands  of  the  Indians  to  the  effect  heretofore  stated,  and  have  a 
surplus  of  water  sufficient  to  irrigate  at  least  140.000  acres  besides. 

This  surplus  would  be  at  hand  were  the  dam  raised  but  150  feet;  and  when 
raised  70  feet  higher  that  surplus  would  be  nearly  enough  to  irrigate  a  half  mil¬ 
lion  acres.  There  would  be  sufficient  water  in  this  surplus,  at  a  fair  price,  far 
below  what  white  settlers  now  pay  for  water  rights,  to  place  all  of  their  lands 
already  purchased  in  a  high  state  of  cultivation,  and  to  reach  and  reclaim  much 
of  the  now  Government  land  undisposed  of.  which  might  be  disposed  of  to  the 
white  settlers  at  a  reasonable  price  per  acre  with  the  water  rights  attached.  These, 
all  taken  together,  would  reimburse  the  Government  for  its  outlay  in  less  than 
ten  years.  This  being  done  would  take  the  Indians  off  of  the  expense  list  of  the 
Government — they  would  be  made  self-sustaining.  Hundreds  of  thousands  of 
acres  of  now  idle  land  would  be  reclaimed  and  hundreds  of  homes  made  for  the 
white  settlers,  and  great  wealth  thereby  added  to  the  already  existing  wealth  of 
the  country. 

On  the  general  topic  I  maintain  the  Government  should  reclaim  its 
arid  lands,  and  on  this  I  say  that  money  expended  for  the  reclamation 
of  arid  lands  will  result  in  a  still  greater  growth  and  a  still  greater 
development,  greater  production  of  wealth  than  any  other  single  enter¬ 
prise  in  which  the  Government  may  embark.  I  have  the  data  here, 
the  figures  showing  what  has  heretofore  been  expended  on  other  enter¬ 
prises  less  important  than  this  one. 

Therefore,  by  your  consent,  and  having  your  undivided  attention, 
appearing  for  that  brave  people  in  my  portion  of  the  West  who  braved 
the  dangers  of  the  West,  then  inhabited  by  savage  tribes,  living  under 
the  burning  sun,  where  the  bird  was  without  song,  and  who  put  their 
hands  on  the  savage  mane  and  led  him  from  bloody  plains  of  savage 
warfare  to  safe  fields  of  industry  and  homes  of  civilized  quiet  peace, 
I  proceed  to  the  detailed  statement  of  facts  and  give  them  as  reasons 
why  the  Government  should  undertake  to  reclaim  these  arid  lands. 
I  submit  also  that  these  facts,  grouped  as  argument,  are  more  cogent 
and  strong  than  any  facts  and  arguments  that  were  ever  offered  at  the 
beginning  of  the  governmental  action  in  building  internal  canals  for 
internal  commerce. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


77 


I  apprehend  that  anyone  who  has  not  given  particular  attention  to 
this  question  has  no  idea  of  the  amount  of  land  to  be  disposed  of  by 
the  General  Government.  The  Land  Department,  up  to  a  few  years 
ago,  had  not  the  slightest  conception  of  it  itself.  Only  about  twenty- 
five  years  ago  we  heard  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  that  there 
were  perhaps  10,000,000  acres  of  public  lands  for  sale;  and  yet  since 
that  time  there  have  been  over  150,000,000  acres  sold,  more  than  twice 
the  area  of  the  Republic  of  France ;  and  since  the  investigation  has 
/  been  carried  to  its  limit  it  has  been  found  that  there  are  more  than 
567,000,000  acres  of  Government  lands  subject  to  its  disposition  to-day. 

Of  that  567,000,000  acres  of  public  lands  subject  to  the  disposition 
of  the  Government  there  are  541,265,248  acres  of  it  in  the  arid  West, 
in  the  15  States  and  Territories  in  the  Union  known  as  the  arid  region. 
An  equal  distribution  of  these  lands  among  the  several  States,  situ¬ 
ated  as  they  are,  side  by  side,  makes  it  a  matter  of  inquiry  as  to 
whether  or  not  it  is  not  policy  for  the  nation  to  take  charge  of  them 
and  place  them  in  condition  for  sale  to  possible  home  seekers  of  the 
Union,  in  which  over  76,000,000  of  our  people  live  and  to  whom  the 
lands  belong. 

I  believe  in  equal  distribution;  and  perhaps  it  is  difficult  to  under¬ 
stand  how  the  public  land  can  be  distributed  in  order  that  we  may 
advance  the  theory  that  the  distribution  and  reclamation  of  so  vast  a 
territory  should  be  a  national  affair. 

The  reclamation  of  the  arid  lands  should  be  by  the  Government, 
because  of  the  immensity  of  the  amount  to  be  reclaimed,  and  of  its 
even  distribution  over  the  arid  States  and  Territories,  and  because  it 
must  be  reclaimed  almost  entirely  by  means  of  irrigation,  if  reclaimed 
at  all — all  in  view  of  the  fact  that  it  is  now  the  property  of  the  Gen¬ 
eral  Government.  Public  opinion  can  hardly  realize  that  there  is  now, 
or  was  at  the  end  of  the  fiscal  year  1899,  a  little  more  than  567,000,000 
acres  of  public  land  undisposed  of  by  the  Government;  yet  it  is  true, 
and  541,265,248  acres  of  this  amount  is  situated  in  the  arid  States  and 
Territories,  and  is  distributed  as  follows : 


Arizona.. .. 
California  . 
Colorado . . . 

Idaho _ 

Kansas 
Montana. 
Nebraska  .. 
Nevada 


Acres. 
54, 608, 531 
50, 132, 241 
41, 988, 377 
34, 225, 149 
734, 080 
74,558,143 
10, 799,  332 
42, 385, 735 


New  Mexico  . 

Oregon  . 

North  Dakota 
South  Dakota 

Utah . 

Washington  - 
W  yoming 


Acres. 
54, 720, 863 
38, 435, 873 
19, 500, 555 
13, 006,  396 
35.231,466 
19, 098, 420 
52,  055, 248 


This  list  shows  something  of  an  even  distribution  of  these  lands 
over  the  arid  States  and  Territories,  and  in  view  of  this  fact  it  becomes 
important  to  know  something  of  how  much  of  it  is  subject  to  recla¬ 
mation,  and  how.  As  to  this,  the  most  authentic  means  at  our  com¬ 
mand  is  the  report  of  the  special  Senate  committee  of  the  United 
States  Senate  on  the  reclamation  of  arid  lands  and  irrigation,  made 
to  the  Senate  in  1890.  In  that  they  reported  that  there  was  from 
100,000,000  to  150,000,000  acres  of  this  land  that  could  be  made  pro¬ 
ductive,  and  that  only  by  means  of  irrigation — more  than  five  times  the 
quantity  of  reclaimed  land  in  British  India,  from  which  110,000,000 
people  are  maintained.  Some  maintain  that  these  lands  should  be 
ceded  to  the  States  and  Territories.  All  history  shows  that  this  would 
be  a  failure.  Especially  is  it  so  here. 

By  the  acts  of  Congress,  March  2,  1849,  to  the  act  of  March  12, 1860, 
nearly  60,000,000  acres  of  land  of  the  General  Government,  lying  in 


78 


AEID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


15  States  of  the  Union,  known  as  swamp  lands,  were  ceded  to  the  vari¬ 
ous  States  in  which  they  lay.  They  are  as  follows: 


Alabama . 
Arkansas 
California 
Florida  . . . 
Illinois. ... 
Indiana . . 

Iowa _ 

Louisiana 


Acres. 


Acres. 


414,310 
7, 668, 987 
1,773,857 
16,631.302 
1,493,718 
1,265,107 
933, 949 
8,968,880 


Michigan  .. 
Minnesota  . 
Mississippi . 
Missouri . .  _ 

Ohio  . 

Oregon  .... 
Wisconsin  . 


5, 729, 843 
3,109,142 
3,325,437 
4,495,816 
25, 660 
315,164 
3, 349, 132 


These  are  the  beneficiary  States  of  the  swamp-land  grants;  and 
they  are  all,  with  a  single  exception,  better  able,  so  far  as  monetary 
expenditure  may  be  concerned,  to  reclaim  these  lands  granted  to 
them  by  means  of  the  levee  system  (and  which  is  but  the  counterpart 
of  the  reservoir  and  canal  system  necessary  to  reclaim  the  arid  lands, 
and  far  less  expensive)  than  any  of  the  arid  States  and  Territories 
are  to  reclaim  the  arid  lands  in  their  boundaries.  This  will  not  be 
denied  by  those  who  oppose  this  theory  I  apprehend,  because  through 
the  whole  space  of  nearly  fifty  years  not  a  single  one  of  these 
States  has  ever  made  a  single  record  of  success  by  the  reclamation  of 
any  of  these  lands  that  had  to  be  reclaimed.  They  mostly  went  into 
the  hands  of  alien  speculators  and  land  sharks  for  naught.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  history  of  other  countries  that  have  taken  the  matter 
of  reclaiming  their  arid  lands  in  hand  as  a  national  enterprise  for 
their  people  have  made  a  prime  success  of  it  in  every  instance. 

From  time  immemorial  Egypt  has  maintained  her  entire  population 
on  lands  that  Egypt  reclaimed  as  a  national  enterprise,  and  by  it,  in 
ages  past,  gained  the  name  and  title  “The  granary  of  the  world.” 

This  is  no  failure,  and  is  an  argument  in  our  favor.  Not  only  so, 
but  in  British  India,  where  famine  and  starvation  in  former  days  pre¬ 
vailed  because  of  the  shortage  in  the  production  of  the  soil,  since  the 
reclamation  of  about  26,000,000  of  acres  of  land  by  the  Government 
as  a  national  project  famine  has  been  prevented,  death  from  starva¬ 
tion  has  ceased,  and  110,000,000  of  its  people  are  maintained  from  the 
production  of  the  reclaimed  land  by  the  hand  of  the  Government. 
This  is  the  success  recorded  in  history  for  that  enterprise. 

The  Governments  of  France,  Spain,  Algeria,  Australia,  Argentina, 
and  Peru  all  bear  the  same  testimony  without  a  break  on  the  same 
point.  Therefore  we  see  that  in  every  instance  when  the  work  was 
taken  in  hand  as  a  national  enterprise  it  was  a  success,  while  on  the 
other  hand,  when  turned  into  the  charge  of  the  State,  in  every  single 
instance  it  has  proved  a  failure,  and  hence  we  fear  the  dangerous 
course  wherein  this  all-important  matter  of  reclaiming  the  public 
domain  has  so  often  heretofore  fallen  and  foundered,  and  cling  to 
that  which  has  so  often  carried  its  followers  into  the  haven  of  success. 

Another  reason  is  that,  in  the  event  of  the  States  and  Territories 
being  financially  able  to  reclaim  the  lands,  insuperable  physicial  bar¬ 
riers  would  be  so  prominently  in  the  way  that  it  could  not  be  made 
practically  effectual  there. 

This  would  be  due  to  the  fact  that  all  of  the  streams  of  anj^  great  mag¬ 
nitude  in  the  West,  and  upon  which  the  greatest  irrigation  schemes 
would  necessarily  depend  for  the  reclamation  of  the  greatest  bodies  of 
these  arid  lands,  have  their  source  in  Wyoming,  Colorado,  and  New 
Mexico.  If  these  States  should  have  the  sovereign  control  of  these  lands 
in  their  boundaries  they  would  necessarily  have  the  water  as  well,  and 
would,  as  a  matter  of  sovereign  right,  have  the  control  of  it,  and 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


79 


would  therefore  be  able  to  defy  the  law  of  prior  appropriations  as 
applied  between  individuals,  and  by  diverting  the  head  waters  of  those 
streams  would  have  those  States  and  Territories  lying  below  them  at 
their  mercy.  At  least  it  would  be  so  in  a  measure.  To  state  these 
physical  advantages  in  favor  of  those  three  sovereign  communities  is 
to  argue  the  case  on  this  point,  in  so  far  as  I  now  have  the  time  to 
advert  to  it  on  that  point. 

Again,  to  ask  this  reclamation  to  be  made  by  the  General  Govern¬ 
ment  for  the  people  of  the  West  would  be  asking  only  fair  and  impar¬ 
tial  treatment  as  between  them  and  the  people  of  the  South  and  East 
and  North.  It  would  be  asking  no  more  for  the  benefit  of  agriculture 
in  the  West  than  the  Government  has  done  for  the  benefit  of  inland 
commerce  in  those  sections  just  named. 

For  the  benefit  of  inland  commerce  in  those  sections  the  Government 
has  appropriated  from  time  to  time  as  original  expenditure,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  cost  of  keeping  up  the  various  canals,  etc. ,  in  which  it 
had  an  interest,  no  less  than  $230,850,567.60,  and,  as  before  stated, 
none  will  deny  that  this  was  wisely  expended. 

These  expenditures  have  been  somewhat  of  a  local  nature  too,  rather 
than  national,  or  for  the  national  benefit.  They  were  as  follows — that 
is,  there  has  been  expended  for  inland  commerce  in  the  boundaries  of 
the  following  States  the  following : 


Alabama . $2,764,191.19 

Arkansas .  784, 910. 28 

California .  4,181,251.78 

Connecticut- .  2, 696, 545. 19 

Delaware .  3,  223, 118.  44 

District  of  Columbia _  240, 000. 00 

Florida .  2,511,509.05 

Georgia. . . .  3,382,538.91 

Idaho . .  15, 000. 00 

Illinois.... . 4,948,784.11 

Indiana . . .  1,869,753.03 

Iowa .  319,  563. 37 

Kansas . . . 7,561.73 

Kentucky .  1,705,531.99 

Louisiana .  9,609,451.85 

Maine  . .  2, 483, 686.  66 

Maryland . . .  3,790,876.83 

Massachusetts . . .  4, 943, 767. 10 

Michigan . .  3, 805, 167. 81 

Minnesota . . .  1,771,810.46 


Mississippi . .  $2, 323, 856. 10 

New  Hampshire .  434, 930. 36 

New  Jersey . .  2,068,087.26 

New  York . . 17,495,321.60 

North  Carolina . . .  4, 046. 935. 07 

Ohio.... . 5,741,812.37 

Oregon  .  5, 264, 863. 66 

Pennsylvania .  2,451,292.25 

Rhode  Island .  1,  538, 214. 00 

South  Carolina . . .  2, 912, 679. 90 

Tennessee .  670 , 089 . 85 

Texas. . 6,652,697.16 

Vermont. .  767,946.84 

Virginia-... . 3,837,643.23 

W ashington  ...  . . . .  534, 232. 28 

Wisconsin . . .  7, 705, 301. 32 

Miscellaneous  expendi¬ 
ture  .  188, 405, 189.  96 


Total .  230, 850, 567.  60 


Not  only  so,  but  in  at  least  twenty  States  in  the  Union  the  Govern¬ 
ment  has  exercised  the  functions  of  a  canal  builder,  not  unwisely 
either,  as  before  stated,  and  not  in  a  single  instance  has  it  been  done 
in  any  part  of  the  vast  arid  W est ;  and  it  has  also  all  been  done  in  the 
direct  interest  of  commerce  and  not  of  agriculture.  As  evidence  of 
this  we  submit  the  following  statistics  bearing  on  this  subject: 

In  the  last  fifty-three  years  Congress  has  expended  in  cleaning  and 
improving  harbors,  building  dams,  canals,  and  the  like  work  gener¬ 
ally  $392,606,596.28. 

In  1896  alone  for  the  same  purpose  $71,158,956.88  was  expended. 

This  was  all  for  the  benefit  of  commerce  in  the  East. 

For  canals  and  dams  alone,  for  the  benefit  of  commerce  mainly,  if 
not  alone,  the  Government  has  made  the  following  appropriations  in 
the  following-named  States : 

Alabama. — Grant  of  5  per  cent  net  proceeds  of  public  lands  after  1819;  sale  of 
same  for  canal  on  Tennessee  River,  $10,000. 

Florida. — For  the  Peninsula  Canal,  $50,000. 


80 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Illinois.— Lake  Michigan  and  Mississippi  River  Canal,  $200,000;  Hennepin  Canal, 
$50,000. 

Indiana. — Wabash  River  Dam  and  Canal,  $65,000;  Lake  Erie  and  Wabash  River 
Canal,  $15,000;  Ohio  v.  land  grant  of  2|  sections  on  each  side  of  all  canals. 

Iowa. — Canal  from  Red  River  to  Mississippi,  $1,500;  Des  Moines  Rapids  Canal, 
$733,750;  Sault  Ste.  Marie  Canal,  $65,000. 

Kentucky. — Louisville  and  Portland  Canal,  purchase  of  1,000  shares  of  stock  of 
the  private  corporation  organized  to  bui.d  it.  Value,  $100,000.  Subsequent  pur¬ 
chase  and  maintenance  of  the  same,  $825,000. 

Ohio. — Ohio  River  Falls  Canal,  $90,000;  Cumberland  River  Canal,  $10,000;  Rough 
River  Canal,  $25,000;  Zanesville  and  Taylorville  Canal,  $102,000. 

Louisiana. — New  Orleans  Outlet  Canal  and  Clarenton  Canal,  $150,000. 

Mississippi. — Carondelet  Canal,  $25,000;  canal  from  Mississippi  to  Gulf  of  Mex¬ 
ico,  $75,000;  also  6  per  cent  net  proceeds  of  all  public-land  sales  for  canal  purposes. 

Michigan. — Grant  of  300,000  acres  of  land  to  build  canal  between  Lake  Superior 
and  Lac  La  Belle;  St.  Clair  Canal,  $1,096,250;  Secretary  of  War  authorized  to  draw 
for  annual  expenses  for  maintaining  the  canal;  St.  Mary’s  Canal,  $850,000;  Secre¬ 
tary  of  War  authorized  to  draw  for  annual  expenses  in  maintaining  the  canal. 

New  Jersey. — Ship  canal  across  Bergen  Neck,  $150,000. 

Oregon. — Cascade  Canal,  $1,728,000. 

Pennsylvania. — Surveys  for  ship  canal  from  Allegheny  to  the  sea,  $200,000;  pur¬ 
chase  of  Mouongahela  Canal  and  improvements  of  the  same,  $358,733. 

South  Carolina.—  Purchase  of  800  shares  of  Dismal  Swamp  Canal  Company’s 
stock;  Santee  Canal,  $39,000. 

Tennessee. — Tennessee  River  Canal,  $250,000. 

Texas.—  Galveston  and  Brazos  River  Canal,  $25,000. 

Virginia. — Purchase  of  750  shares  of  Chesapeake  Canal  Stock  Company’s  stock; 
purchase  of  10,000  shares  of  Chesapeake  and  Ohio  Company’s  stock;  Chesapeake 
and  Delaware  Canal,  $20,000;  survey  canal  Chesapeake  Bay  to  Charleston,  $10,000. 

Washington. — Survey  canal  Lake  Union  to  Puget  Sound,  $10,000. 

Survey  canal  Bakers  Bay  and  Shoalwater  Bay,  $10,500. 

Wisconsin.  — F ox  River  and  Wisconsin  River  Canal,  Id  sections  of  land  on  each 
side  of  Fox  River.  $25,000;  Milwaukee  and  Rock  River  Canal,  5  per  cent  of  net 
proceeds  of  public  land  sales.  $146,000;  Wisconsin  River  Canal,  $10,000;  Green 
Bay  and  Lake  Michigan  Canal,  grant  of  200,000  acres.  Purchase  of  portage  of 
Lake  Michigan  and  Lake  Superior  Canal,  $350,000;  improving  same,  $20,000. 

To  this  much  we  refer  to  show  what  the  Government  has  done  for 
the  benefit  of  inland  commerce  in  the  sections  of  country  before 
named,  and  that  the  Government  has  wisely  done  it  as  a  national 
work  we  are  here  to  assert.  But  while  we  do,  we  further  assert  that, 
as  a  work  of  the  General  Gevernment,  between  the  construction  of  a 
reservoir  for  the  encouragement  of  inland  commerce  and  the  con¬ 
struction  of  one  for  agriculture,  there  is  practically  no  difference; 
and  if  there  is,  then  the  argument  is  in  favor  of  the  latter. 

To  ask  for  this  reclamation  of  the  arid  lands  of  the  West  by  the 
General  Goverment  for  the  benefit  of  agriculture  in  this  great  West¬ 
ern  country  is  only  to  ask  that  fair  play  and  even-handed  justice  be 
done  between  the  different  sections  of  this  great  country.  It  is  but 
an  appeal  to  the  magnanimity  of  the  General  Government. 

From  May,  1875,  to  June  30,  1896,  the  Government  received  from 
the  sale  of  public  lands,  chiefly  from  the  West,  $336,532,129.20,  which 
was  expended  in  Eastern  improvements.  Scarcely  a  dollar  was  ever 
returned  for  any  Eastern  improvement  or  benefit. 

This  great  Government  can  not  afford  to  stain  its  name  with  par¬ 
tiality  so  great  as  to  refuse  to  add  its  aid  to  that  vast  section  in  the 
West  for  the  benefit  of  agriculture  when  it  has  done  so  much  for 
commercial  classes  and  commercial  sections  in  other  parts  of  the 
county.  Indeed,  my  people  do  not  expect  it.  They  believe  that  this 
great  country,  whose  bosom  but  a  short  time  ago  was  trodden  by  the 
hoof  of  war,  that  passed  from  under  it  and  through  the  greatest  war 
ever  known  to  civilization,  and  did  it  successfully,  and  did  it  without 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.  ' 


81 


the  confiscation  of  a  single  estate  or  the  execution  of  a  single  politi¬ 
cal  offender,  can  never  be  so  unfair. 

Mr.  Barham.  Mr.  Chairman,  Mr.  Mondell  would  like  to  have  a 
few  moments  to  continue  his  remarks. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  FRANK  W.  MONDELL,  OF  WYOMING. 

Mr.  Chairman:  The  committee  very  kindly  gave  me  some  time 
the  other  day,  and  before  I  had  concluded  the  hour  of  12  had  arrived, 
and  it  was  suggested  that  I  should  conclude  to-day.  I  will  take  but 
a  short  time,  as  Mr.  Mead,  the  irrigation  expert  from  the^Depart- 
ment  of  Agriculture,  is  here,  and  I  know  you  will  be  glad  to  hear  from 
him,  he  having  been  invited  by  Mr.  Wilson  and  the  committee. 

I  hope  I  made  my  position  on  some  phases  of  the  questions  of 
national  aid  to  irrigation  development  clear  the  other  day,  and  I  shall 
not  go  into  that  matter  to-day  except  to  reiterate  briefly  that  it  seems 
to  me  that  the  work  which  the  National  Government  should  under¬ 
take  in  the  interest  of  irrigation  is  the  work  suggested  by  the  resolu¬ 
tions  of  the  Irrigation  Congress  last  year.  That  is  the  work  of  con¬ 
servation — of  making  the  waters  of  the  arid  regions  available  for  irri¬ 
gation  and  does  not  contemplate  the  Government’s  actually  reclaiming 
lands.  The  distribution  of  water  in  irrigation  is  a  local  enterprise  and 
maybe  left  to  individual  enterprise  to  carry  out.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  work  of  making  available  the  waters  which  the  Almighty  has  pro¬ 
vided  in  the  arid  regions  which  are  now  available  only  to  the  extent 
of  a  veiy  small  proportion  of  their  entire  volume,  owing  to  the  fact 
that  they  rush  down  in  flood  periods  and  not  uniformly  during  the 
irrigation  season,  is  a  public  work. 

I  believe  we  are  more  likely  to  get  Government  aid  by  confining 
our  efforts,  as  suggested  by  the  National  Irrigation  Congress,  to 
appropriations  for  conservation  projects — conservation  projects  in 
the  nature  of  storage  reservoirs  at  the  headwaters  of  streams  to  store 
flood  waters,  to  be  turned  loose  in  the  latter  portion  of  the  irrigation 
season  to  make  up  for  the  deficiency  in  flow,  and  conservation  pro¬ 
jects  where  the  proposition  is  to  take  waters  of  a  great  stream  in  the 
watershed  of  which  there  is  no  irrigable  land  and  divert  it  to  the 
watershed  of  another  stream  where  there  is  irrigable  land.  Also  those 
projects  where  streams,  lying  in  deep  canyons,  would  require  divert¬ 
ing  canals  of  great  length  and  at  great  cost  to  bring  the  water  to  the 
surface,  to  place  it  in  the  same  position  that  nature  placed  the  water 
of  those  streams  that  flow  near  the  surface.  In  brief,  the  work  which 
the  Government  should  undertake  is  that  of  making  available  all  of 
the  water  in  the  arid  regions  for  irrigation  purposes. 

Mr.  Reeder.  When  the  Government  has  made  this  available  by 
your  plan,  does  your  bill  propose  a  plan  as  to  who  shall  then  deter¬ 
mine  how  the  water  shall  be  devoted? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  will  say  to  the  gentleman  that  every  State  in  the 
arid  region  has  a  code  of  laws  and  customs  relative  to  the  diversion 
and  use  of  waters,  and  under  these  laws  and  customs  all  waters  used 
in  irrigation  in  the  arid  region  must  be  diverted  and  applied.  The 
National  Government  can  not  attempt  to  interfere  with  those  laws  and 
customs  without  endless  confusion.  I  think  the  Government  aid 
should  begin  with  the  work  of  a  purely  national  character,  and  end 
where  you  have  placed  the  waters  where  private  enterprise  can  divert 
and  distribute  them;  and  my  idea  is  that  in  doing  this  the  Govern- 

11196—01 - 6 


82 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


merit  should  expect  no  direct  return.  If  you  had  a  specific  project 
before  you,  where  it  seemed  that  there  was  an  opportunity  to  secure  a 
return,  I  do  not  know  that  there  would  be  any  objection  to  an  attempt 
to  do  that,  but  I  have  some  doubts  of  the  feasibility  of  the  Govern¬ 
ment’s  securing  a  full  reimbursement,  except  it  shall  collect  the  same 
through  the  medium  of  the  States  by  a  charge  for  the  use  of  the  waters 
made  available  in  addition  of  course  to  whatever  nominal  charge  the 
Government  might  make  for  public  lands  under  its  project.  It  nar¬ 
rows  the  scope  of  Government  aid  and  the  possibility  of  Government 
expenditure  tremendously  to  say  that  it  shall  begin  and  end  with  stor¬ 
age  and  large  stream  diversion.  Instead,  then,  of  it  being  a  question 
whether*  the  Government  shall  actually  aid  in  the  irrigation  of  per¬ 
haps  75,000,000  acres  at  a  considerable  cost  per  acre,  the  problem  is 
simply  one  of  making  available  for  use  in  irrigation  the  waters  of  the 
arid  regions.  This  is  the  work  which  private  enterprise  cannot  under¬ 
take  and  which  the  States  can  not  so  well  undertake  as  the  National 
Government,  because  in  nearly  all  of  these  enterprises  there  are  inter¬ 
state  questions. 

The  bill  (H.  R.  13993)  which  I  introduced  on  this  subject,  after  dedi¬ 
cating  the  proceeds  from  the  sales  of  public  lands  to  the  aid  of  irriga¬ 
tion,  provided  for  a  full  and  comprehensive  report  from  the  Geological 
Survey,  to  be  made  to  Congress  next  winter,  as  to  the  general  subject, 
and  report  of  the  detailed  survey  and  examination  of  at  least  one 
project  for  the  conservation  or  development  of  water  in  each  arid  and 
semiarid  State,  to  be  presented  to  the  Congress  as  a  basis  of  legisla¬ 
tion  as  the  reports  of  the  Chief  of  Engineers  are  presented  to  Congress 
for  the  use  of  the  River  and  Harbor  Committee  at  the  beginning  of  each 
Congress. 

I  think  that  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  Newlands  that  the  public-lands 
fund  shall  in  the  future  be  dedicated  to  the  cause  of  irrigation  a  wise 
one.  He  dedicates  it  in  his  bill  to  the  irrigation  of  arid  lands;  I 
dedicate  it  in  mine  to  works  for  making  the  waters  of  the  arid  region 
available  for  irrigation. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  It  has  been  dedicated  two  or  three  times 
before,  and  any  part  that  still  remains,  I  am  afraid,  is  so  limited  that 
little  can  be  accomplished. 

The  Chairman.  There  is  this  to  be  said  in  favor  of  this  idea,  as  it 
impresses  me:  Supposing  it  were  possible — which  of  course  it  is  not — 
that  this  entire  75,000,000  acres  of  redeemable  land  could  be  redeemed 
at  once;  of  course  one  result  would  be  that,  instead  of  the  agricultural 
lands  of  the  United  States  being  lifted  in  value,  that  they  would,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  be  decreased  in  value.  These  lands  are  to  be  reclaimed 
as  the  country  needs  them.  The  proposed  bill  introduces  a  system  of 
putting  the  public-lands  fund  to  this  purpose;  you  go  faster  as  you 
need  it,  and  you  will  slack  up  as  you  need  it.  It  is  going  to  be  diffi¬ 
cult  to  get  the  farmers  in  my  section  of  Oregon  to  approve  of  any 
scheme  that  will  put  down  the  value  of  lands;  but  this  is  a  safety 
valve,  and  as  you  need  it  the  fund  will  expand,  and  then  as  you  do 
not  need  them  it  will  contract.  I  am  much  pleased  with  the  sug¬ 
gestion. 

Mr.  Newlands.  You  could  provide  that  a  certain  price  per  acre 
should  be  demanded.  I  wish  to  say  another  thing  with  reference  to 
the  charges  against  this  fund.  It  is  true,  as  I  understand  it,  that 
when  agricultural  colleges  were  started  in  this  country  that  the  appro¬ 
priations  were  made  for  them  out  of  the  public-lands  fund,  and  that 
fund  was  charged  with  that  obligation ;  but  it  has  long  since  been 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


83 


relieved  of  it.  The  appropriations  now  made  for  the  agricultural  col¬ 
leges  are  a  part  of  the  agricultural  hill  of  the  House. 

Mr.  Mondell.  The  bill  referred  to  would  utilize  the  fund,  whatever 
sum  there  might  be  in  it,  and  provides  for  surveys  and  a  report  to 
Congress  next  January,  in  order  that  the  Congress  may  have  before  it 
a  general  statement  of  the  entire  matter  and  at  least  one  conservation 
project  in  each  State  and  Territory  in  the  arid  and  semiarid  region. 

The  Chairman.  Let  me  see  if  I  can  understand  your  idea.  You 
propose  to  build  dams  merely  by  the  Government,  and  there  is  to  be 
no  charge  upon  any  lands  for  that.  How  do  you  propose  to  distribute 
the  water — merely  to  pass  it  down  the  streams  in  some  regular  way 
by  the  Government,  or  do  you  propose  to  have  ditches  and  draw  it 
direct  from  the  dam;  and  if  so,  if  it  is  to  be  drawn  from  the  dams,  in 
what  way  is  it  to  be  done? 

Mr.  Mondell.  My  idea  is  that  conservation  works  should  be  under¬ 
taken  as  public  works  on  internal  improvement,  and  when  the  water 
is  conserved  it  should  be  turned  loose  at  the  proper  time  to  supple¬ 
ment  the  waning  flow  of  the  streams. 

The  question  of  the  distribution  of  the  water,  taking  it  out  of  the 
streams,  and  the  use  of  it,  are  to  be  left  entirely  as  they  are  now,  to 
State  laws  and  State  customs.  The  States  have  an  elaborate  system 
of  laws  and  customs  and  regulations  on  this  subject  which  are  being 
perfected  every  year,  and  the  States  are  well  qualified,  in  my  opinion, 
to  handle  the  question  of  the  distribution  of  the  water. 

I  referred  the  other  day  to  the  Carey  Act,  which  I  consider  a  valua¬ 
ble  auxiliary  to  this  movement.  Under  that  act  projects  of  diversion 
and  distribution  too  large  to  be  undertaken  b}^  individuals  holding 
lands  under  the  desert-land  law,  can  be  successfully  carried  out 
under  contract  with  the  State,  to  reclaim  large  areas  which  are  wholly 
public  lands  where  the  initial  cost  of  diversion  is  so  great  that  an 
individual  or  small  neighborhood  of  people  could  not  divert  it  them¬ 
selves.  Beginning  at  the  genesis  of  irrigation,  then,  the  ordinary 
diversion  and  distribution  is  accomplished  by  the  individual,  the  asso¬ 
ciation  of  farmers  and  others;  the  larger  diversions  and  distributions, 
where  the  problem  is  one  of  irrigation  onty  of  public  lands,  can  be 
undertaken  under  the  Carey  Act;  and  then  you  come  to  the  problems 
of  conservation  and  the  diversion  of  great  streams  to  foreign  water¬ 
sheds  or  from  deep  canyons,  and  these  are,  in  my  opinion,  works 
which  must  be  accomplished  through  public  agencies,  preferably  the 
nation,  because  in  nearly  all  of  these  propositions  there  are  interstate 
questions  involved. 

The  State  of  Nevada  could  not  well  go  into  California  and  impound 
the  waters  of  Lake  Tahoe,  and  it  is  necessary  to  impound  those 
waters  to  make  available  a  great  river  in  that  State,  and  so  that  is 
properly  a  National  and  not  a  State  work.  Even  if  it  were  practica¬ 
ble  to  construct  and  manage  large  storage  systems  by  private  enter¬ 
prise,  they  should  not  be  so  managed  because  a  system  of  storage 
reservoirs  at  the  head  of  a  stream  is  such  an  important  factor  in  the 
floAv  of  the  stream  during  the  entire  season,  and  so  intimately  affects 
all  users  of  water  along  the  stream,  that  they  should  be  at  all  times 
under  public  control  and  never  under  private  control.  We  can 
defend  our  advocacy  of  national  aid  in  this  class  of  work  because  it 
is  national;  it  is  public  in  its  character  and  it  does  not  directly 
reclaim  any  man’s  land.  It  can  not  be  said  that  it  is  an  expenditure 
of  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  public  lands  to  irrigate  Jones’s  land,  or 
Smith’s  land,  or  Brown’s  land,  because  it  does  not  make  it  any  cheaper 


84 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


for  Smith,  or  Jones,  or  Brown  to  irrigate  their  lands  than  it  would 
have  been  for  them  if  nature,  instead  of  sending  those  waters  down 
in  tremendous  volumes  in  the  early  spring  and  then  reducing  the  flow 
later,  sent  the  streams  down  in  a  steady  and  continuous  flow. 

The  Government  would  simply  undertake  the  work  of  rectifying 
nature’s  work,  as  we  rectify  nature’s  work  when  we  remove  sand  bars 
from  the  mouths  of  rivers  and  harbors,  when  we  take  shoals  out  of 
interstate  streams.  We  do  not  in  river  and  harbor  work  build  the 
wharves  on  the  banks  or  provide  the  anchorages,  but  we  rectify  the 
work  of  nature  by  making  the  waterways  available  for  commerce; 
and  we  now  ask  the  Government  to  rectify  the  work  of  nature  in  the 
arid  regions  to  the  extent  of  making  available  for  use  in  irrigation  the 
waters  which  are  now  valueless  by  reason  of  their  uneven  and  uncer¬ 
tain  flow.  I  believe  that  individuals  and  associations  under  the  State 
can  then  attend  to  the  work  of  distribution  of  water  over  the  lands, 
and  if  the  Government  works  sto£)  at  conservation,  then  there  is  no 
possible  conflict  between  the  State  and  the  National  Government. 

Mr.  Barham.  As  I  understand  your  proposition,  you  take  a  stream, 
for  instance,  that  you  could  not  irrigate  unless  you  conserved  or  res- 
ervoired  the  waters  up  in  the  mountains.  Take  Clear  Lake.  That  is 
partly  in  my  district.  Now,  if  you  only  conserve  the  waters  to  come 
down  Cache  Creek,  it  would  be  of  little  or  no  benefit  at  all;  but  you 
have  got  to  conserve  the  waters  or  reservoir  them  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  carry  them  out  at  an  elevation  above  where  you  could  carry 
them  out  on  the  stream  now  and  reservoir  the  waters  at  a  point  in  the 
mountains,  in  the  canyon.  Your  proposition  is  simply  to  build  a  dam 
at  a  point  on  Cache  Creek,  say,  or  at  the  mouth  of  Clear  Lake,  and 
back  up  the  water,  catch  the  waters,  and  then  let  the  State  attend  to 
the  balance  of  it,  about  digging  the  canals  and  carrying  it  through 
the  valley? 

Here  conies  the  Cache  Creek  through  a  deep  canyon,  and  reaches 
the  valley.  Now,  where  we  use  that  water  at  all,  it  is  way  down  where 
the  river  can  be  diverted  or  is  diverted.  If  you  hold  more  water  up 
here  and  catch  it  in  the  lake,  you  want  to  start  that  canal  or  river  100 
miles  above  where  you  use  the  river.  In  that  case  you  would  let  the 
State  or  corporation  attend*  to  it? 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  shall  try  to  confine  Government  aid  to  such  works 
as  are  necessarv  to  make  the  water  available  for  irrigation. 

Mr.  Newlands.  But  your  idea  also,  I  think,  as  I  have  heard  you 
state  it,  covers,  if  necessary,  carrying  the  water  from  the  storage 
reservoirs  over  intervening  mountains,  and  so  forth,  to  the  point 
where  private  enterprise  can  take  hold  of  it? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Yes,  if  that  were  necessary  to  make  the  stored  water 
available;  but  I  have  not  in  mind  any  case  where  you  would  take 
stored  waters  across  a  divide. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  know  of  such  a  case. 

Mr.  Barham.  That  very  case  that  I  illustrated ;  I  know  of  a  dozen 
of  them. 

Mr.  Mondell.  That  would  then  be  part  of  the  work  necessary  to 
make  water  available  for  distribution  under  State  laws  by  private 
enterprise. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Your  plan  then  would  include  the  canal  that  is 
necessary  to  carry  it  to  the  point  where  private  enterprise  would  take 
it? 

Mr.  Mondell.  My  plan  includes  anything  necessary  to  make  water 
available,  and  nothing  for  the  actual  distribution  of  water  over  lands. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


85 


There  is  a  variety  of  projects  that  could  be  taken  up  besides  storage 
reservoirs ;  the  simplest  are  diversions  of  great  rivers  like  the  Colo¬ 
rado  or  the  Green,  where  there  is  a  surplus  of  water  above  the  needs 
of  its  own  watershed,  carrying  it  into  another  drainage  where  there 
is  little  water  but  plenty  of  irrigable  land.  Such  a  diversion  by  the 
Government  does  not  of  course  irrigate  the  land;  it  simply  makes  it 
possible  for  private  enterprise  to  undertake  the  work  of  applying  the 
water  to  the  land. 

/ 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  F.  G.  NEWLANDS,  OF  NEVADA. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Mr.  Elwood  Mead  is  here  as  an  expert  in  these 
matters.  Before  he  speaks  I  would  like  to  state  briefly  my  two  bills, 
so  that  Mr.  Mead  can  address  himself  to  them. 

We  all  agree  in  the  West  that  irrigation  is  a  public  use,  just  as 
navigation  is;  that  the  maintaining  and  sustaining  an  equal  flow  in 
the  river  is  just  as  much  of  a  public  work  as  river  and  harbor  improve¬ 
ments  for  the  promotion  of  navigation  or  commerce.  We  would  all 
be  very  glad  to  see  the  Government  undertake  that  work  of  the  stor¬ 
age  of  water  in  our  rivers  and  the  maintenance  of  an  equal  and  sus¬ 
tained  flow  without  hope  of  compensation,  and  I  have  shaped  a  bill  in 
reference  to  that;  and  I  have  also  shaped  a  bill  which  sets  aside  the 
receipts  from  the  public  lands  as  a  fund  for  the  reclamation  of  the 
public  lands  of  the  West,  which  offers  an  automatic  plan  by  which 
the  West  will  reclaim  itself  through  the  agency  of  the  General 
Government. 

Now,  as  to  the  first  bill  (H.  R.  14072).  I  introduced  that  bill  yester¬ 
day.  It  takes  six  projects  which  the  Geological  Survey  has  examined. 
That  is  the  first  one  I  would  advocate.  It  pertains  to  the  projects 
which  the  Geological  Survey  has  examined  and  upon  which  it  has 
made  detailed  reports,  showing  the  reservoirs  to  be  constructed,  the 
cost  of  construction,  and,  incidentally,  the  area  to  be  benefited  by 
the  improvement.  One  of  these  is  in  Arizona — the  San  Carlos — at  a 
total  cost  of  $1,000,000.  Four  in  California — one,  the  construction  of 
the  Hetch  Hetchy  reservoir,  which  will  cost  $607,000;  another,  the 
Clark  Valley  reservoir,  which  will  cost  $2,000,000;  and  another  work 
in  Clark  Valley,  which  is  auxiliary  to  the  other,  which  will  cost 
$2,100,000;  Stony  Creek  reservoir,  $287,000;  the  Clear  Lake  reservoir, 
$452,000.  Then  conies  Montana,  with  the  diversion  of  the  St.  Mary 
River  into  Milk  River,  costing,  for  the  first  9  miles  out  of  16  miles, 
$325,000.  Then  three  Nevada  enterprises — one,  the  Rock  Creek 
reservoir,  tributary  to  the  Humboldt,  $62,300;  another,  the  Lower 
Humboldt  reservoir,  $148,300;  another,  the  Truckee  River,  costing 
$389,000.  Then  comes  Wyoming,  with  the  Grej^  Bull  reservoir, 
$49,962.  Making  in  all  $6,327,000,  with  the  total  capacity,  in  acre- 
feet,  of  1,415,000.  That  is  to  say,  the  water  stored  in  all  these  reser¬ 
voirs  will  cover  1,415,000  acres  with  water  1  foot  deep,  and,  assuming 
that  that  water  is  directly  applied  to  land  and  that  it  requires  2  feet 
to  the  acre,  it  would  irrigate  about  700,000  acres;  and  the  total  cost 
per  acre-foot  is  $4.47.  That  applies  simply  to  the  storage  and  the 
canals  that  are  necessary  to  make  the  storage  of  waters  available,  and 
not  to  the  diverting  ditches  and  subditches  that  are  necessary  to  irri¬ 
gate  the  land. 

Mr.  Barham.  Upon  all  those  projects  we  have  detailed  and  specific 
reports  and  estimates? 


86 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Newlands.  You  have;  by  the  Geological  Survey. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Do  you  not  think  it  would  be  wiser  to 
divide  this  up  among  the  different  States,  following,  by  analogy,  the 
course  of  the  river  and  harbor  bill? 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  have  patterned  the  bill  upon  the  river  and  har¬ 
bor  bill,  which  takes  first  the  projects  upon  which  plans  and  estimates 
have  been  perfected.  It  considers,  first,  the  Territory  of  Arizona, 
and  appropriates  $150,000  toward  the  construction  of  the  San  Carlos 
dam.  That,  of  course,  will  be  followed  up  by  later  appropriations. 
Then  in  California  it  divides  among  three  reservoirs  there  $150,000 — 
$50,000  each.  It  gives  $150,000  toward  the  project  proposed  in  Mon¬ 
tana.  It  gives  Nevada  for  its  three  or  four  enterprises  $150,000  in 
all,  applying  $30,000  to  the  Rock  Creek  reservoir,  $40,000  to  the  Hum¬ 
boldt  River  reservoir,  and  $80,000  to  the  Truckee  River  reservoirs. 
And  in  Wyoming  it  gives  the  entire  amount  asked  for — $40,000.  In 
all  the  other  States  and  Territories  named  here  $150,000  each.  Then 
it  takes  up  the  question  of  the  surveys  in  each  State  and  Territory 
in  the  arid  and  semiarid  region — Arizona,  California,  Colorado — and, 
acting  upon  the  suggestion  of  the  Geological  Survey,  it  specifies  the 
particular  projects  for  which  plans,  surveys,  and  estimates  are 
required,  and  makes  an  appropriation  for  each  one  of  these  States 
and  Territories,  aggregating  from  $10,000  to  $25,000  in  each,  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  recommendation  of  the  Geological  Survey,  and  it  also  pro¬ 
vides  for  the  test  wells  in  the  artesian-well  districts.  Every  one  of 
these  sixteen  arid  and  semiarid  States  is  covered  by  appropriations 
for  surveys,  and  plans  and  estimates,  aggregating  about  $250,000; 
and  the  completed  projects — that  is,  the  projects  completed  so  far  as 
plans  and  estimates  are  concerned — carry  a  total  appropriation  of 
about  $650,000. 

Now,  I  would  be  very  glad  to  see  that  bill  passed,  but  I  do  not 
believe  in  the  present  temper  of  Congress  it  will  pass,  and  I  think  it 
will  take  years  for  us  to  educate  public  sentiment  to  a  point  where  it 
will  pass.  If  we  wait  long  enough  I  have  no  doubt  it  will  come,  but 
in  the  meanwhile  we  have  reached  in  such  States  as  Nevada  the  abso¬ 
lute  limit  of  development,  unless  the  flow  of  these  rivers  is  maintained. 
And  so  far  as  we  are  concerned,  we  would  rather  enter  now  upon  a 
work  of  reclamation  which  involves  a  restoration  to  this  fund  of  the 
cost  of  reclamation  than  await  the  possible  advantages  of  a  bill  mod¬ 
eled  after  the  river  and  harbor  bill  in  four  or  five  years. 

Now  comes  the  second  bill  (II.  R.  14088),  which  was  my  first.  I 
have  only  introduced  this  other  bill  (II.  R.  14072)  with  reference  to 
the  river  and  harbor  bill  to  meet  the  objections  of  Mr.  Mondell,  and, 
I  believe,  the  partial  objections  of  Mr.  Mead.  I  should  be  very  glad 
to  see  it  pass;  but  I  understand  that  Mr.  Mondell  comes  in  to-day; 
and  I  am  very  glad  he  accepts  the  idea  of  this  reclamation  fund ;  that 
all  he  claims  is  that  the  fund  derived  from  the  sales  of  public  lands 
shall  be  applied,  not  to  the  reclamation  of  public  lands,  but  simply  to 
the  conservation  of  the  waters;  and  I  will  speak  of  that  in  a  few 
moments. 

This  bill  of  mine  (H.  R.  14088)  provides,  first,  that  all  moneys  raised 
from  the  sale  of  public  lands  in  sixteen  States  and  Territories  (naming 
them)  shall  be  set  aside  for  the  creation  of  a  special  fund,  to  be 
called  the  “Arid-land  reclamation  fund,”  which  is  to  be  used  for  the 
construction  of  reservoirs  and  other  hydraulic  works  for  the  storage 
and  diversion  of  water  for  the  irrigation  and  reclaiming  of  arid  lands. 
In  the  first  place,  what  will  be  the  size  of  that  fund?  In  1893  the  sales 
from  public  lands  were  only  about  $900,000.  They  have  increased 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


87 


since,  until  last  year  they  were  nearly  $3,000,000.  Those  extraordi¬ 
nary  receipts,  I  am  told,  arise  largely  from  the  commutation  of  home¬ 
steads  in  Oklahoma.  Under  the  homestead  law  a  man  can  settle 
and  maintain  his  home  for  five  years  and  get  title,  but  he  can,  if  he 
chooses,  at  the  expiration  of  fourteen  months  commute  that  by  the 
payment  of  $1.25  per  acre;  and  many  of  these  men  who  get  productive 
farms  are  glad  to  get  titles  in  that  way,  and  they  make  the  money,  or 
get  it,  and  settle  up  with  the  Government,  and  I  believe  we  will  always 
have  very  large  receipts  from  the  homestead  act,  although  its  purpose 
was  to  give  free  homes. 

Now,  as  to  the  charges  upon  that  fund.  It  is  true  that  when  these 
appropriations  were  made  to  agricultural  colleges  that  they  were  made 
a  charge  upon  the  public-land  fund,  but  long  since  that  has  been 
abandoned  and  these  appropriations  are  part  of  the  regular  appro¬ 
priation  bill.  I  insist  upon  it  that  all  the  proceeds  from  the  sales  of 
public  lands  should  go  into  this  fund,  and  if  there  is  any  question 
about  it  that  we  should  relieve  the  fund  of  that  charge. 

It  is  true  that  in  this  bill  I  provided  “that  all  public  lands,  except¬ 
ing  those  set  aside  by  law  for  educational  purposes,”  etc. — I  believe 
there  are  5  or  10  per  cent  going  to  different  States  for  schools,  etc., 
and  that  is  intended  to  cover  that. 

As  to  the  method  of  making  this  fund  useful  in  the  storage  of  water 
and  the  reclamation  of  public  lands,  section  2  gives  the  Director  of 
the  Geological  Survey  the  power  to  go  along  and  make  investiga¬ 
tions  and  reports,  estimates  and  plans,  both  with  reference  to  the 
storage  of  water  and  the  supply  of  water  through  artesian  wells,  and 
also  the  diversion  of 'streams  into  valleys  that  are  not  subject  to  them. 

The  third  provides  for  the  reports;  the  fourth  provides  that  upon 
the  filing  of  the  reports  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may  withdraw 
from  public  entry  the  lands  which  are  required  for  reservoir  or 
hydraulic  purpose,  or  otherwise  they  would  be  taken  up  by  specula¬ 
tors,  and  it  also  provides  that  lands  subject  to  speculative  schemes 
shall  be  withdrawn,  so  thereafter  they  will  be  subject  to  the  advan¬ 
tages  of  reclamation  schemes,  so  they  can  not  be  taken  in  large  areas, 
and  thus  defeat  the  purpose  of  this  act,  which  is  to  make  homes  for 
people  in  areas  not  exceeding  80  acres. 

The  fourth  section  provides  that  upon  the  determination  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  that  a  project  is  practicable,  that  then  he 
can  let  contracts,  but  the  limit  of  liis  authority  is  the  fund  in  the 
Treasury.  He  can  not  exceed  that.  It  also  provides  that  after  the 
letting  of  a  contract  no  entries  shall  be  made  for  more  than  80  acres; 
that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may,  in  his  discretion,  further  limit 
the  number  of  acres  in  each  entry.  For  instance,  if  there  is  a  project 
presented  as  to  the  lands  capable  of  this  intense  cultivation,  to  which 
the  gentleman  from  Arizona  has  alluded,  then  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  may  provide  a  smaller  unit  of  entry,  thus  increasing  the  num¬ 
ber  of  homes  that  can  be  created  by  a  common  project. 

Now,  I  come  to  the  vital  position,  and  I  have  endeavored  to  modify 
that  in  order  to  meet  the  views  of  Mr.  Mead,  which  he  expressed  with 
great  force  and  clearness  in  the  hearing  before  the  Committee  on 
Public  Lands.  Section  6  provides  “that  upon  the  completion  of  each 
storage  or  irrigation  project  the  total  cost  thereof  shall  be  ascertained 
and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  prescribe  such  rules  and  regu¬ 
lations  as  to  the  price  of  the  lands  entered  or  to  be  entered  and  the 
right  to  use  the  water  provided  by  such  work  as  shall  restore  to  the 
arid-land  reclamation  fund  the  amount  expended  therefor,  in  ten 
annual  installments,  and  shall  also  make  good  to  such  arid-land  recla- 


88 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  L KITED  STATES. 


nation  fund  the  expenses  of  administration  connected  with  such 
work :  Provided  further,  That  the  right  to  the  use  of  the  water  shall 
be  perpetually  apxmrtenant  to  the  land  irrigated,  and  beneficial  use 
shall  be  the  basis,  the  measure,  and  the  limit  of  the  right.”  That, 
you  see,  does  not  compel  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  anywhere  to 
enter  upon  the  work  of  reclamation  of  the  lands  themselves.  Per¬ 
haps  the  bill  is  sufficiently  broad  to  enable  him  to  do  it,  but  it  does 
not  compel  him  to  do  it.  He  can  limit  his  work  absolutely  to  the 
storage  of  water  or  to  the  construction  of  a  canal  that  will  carry  the 
stored  water,  as  Mr.  Mondell  suggests,  to  some  point  where  private 
enterprise  can  take  the  matter  up,  and  it  provides  an  elastic  method 
of  compensation.  The  method  can  be  either  by  increasing  the  price 
of  the  land  or  by  a  charge  for  the  use  of  the  water,  and  that  charge 
can  be,  according  to  his  judgment  and  discretion,  by  the  acre-foot,  as 
Mr.  Mead  suggests,  or  he  can  attach  a  water  right  to  the  land  itself. 

The  endeavor  has  been  to  make  that  so  elastic  that  the  Secretary  of 

«/ 

the  Interior,  with  the  aid  of  the  Geological  Survej^  and  the  experts 
of  the  Government — the  Agricultural  Department  and  the  Interior 
Department  are  in  absolute  harmony  upon  these  questions;  they  are 
acting  in  absolute  harmony  to-day  upon  the  forestry  question,  and 
doubtless  are  on  the  irrigation  question — that  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  with  reference  to  each  project,  can  devise  rules  and  regula¬ 
tions  for  that  project  that  will  work  out  the  greatest  good  to  the  great¬ 
est  number  and  at  the  same  time  retain  this  fund  inviolate  for  the 
reclamation  of  other  lands. 

The  bill  provides: 

That  in  case  the  water  thus  provided  shall  he  more  than  sufficient  for  the  recla¬ 
mation  of  the  public  lands,  or  if  land  in  private  ownership  has  been  found  by  the 
survey  above  authorized  to  be  better  suited  for  the  utilization  of  the  stored  or 
divided  waters,  or  if  there  is  a  sufficiency  of  both,  then  the  right  to  use  such  water 
may  be  sold  at  rates  and  on  terms  to  be  fixed  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  but 
no  water  right  shall  be  sold  to  any  landowner  or  occupant  for  an  amount  exceed¬ 
ing  80  acres. 

The  purpose  there,  as  far  as  entry  is  concerned,  is  to  permit  the 
occupation  of  lands,  and  the  purpose,  so  far  as  giving  the  right  to  use 
water  is  concerned,  is  to  prevent  the  monopoly  of  lands.  As  it  is  in 
the  West,  through  unwise  land  laws,  we  have  great  land  monopolies, 
in  some  cases  as  many  as  several  hundred  thousand  acres  being  under 
one  ownership.  I  think  Mr.  Maxwell  alluded  to  a  case  where  you  can 
travel  on  one  man’s  land  for  100  miles.  So  that  the  purpose  is  not  to 
allow  the  man  who  wants  to  monopolize  land  to  getThe  benefit  of  that, 
but  make  it  to  his  interest  to  divide  up  his  land  into  80-acre  tracts  for 
these  grantees  and  then  obtain  these  rights.  It  works  no  injury  to  the 
landowner.  He  is  not  deprived  of  any  vested  right,  but  it  will  be  to 
his  interest  to  divide  up  his  land  and  to  sell  it. 

These  are  the  provisions  of  the  bill.  I  will  be  glad  to  answer  ques¬ 
tions  regarding  it  at  any  other  time,  but  as  Mr.  Mead’s  time  is  limited 
I  will  now  yield  to  him. 

STATEMENT  OF  ELWOOD  MEAD,  IRRIGATION  EXPERT  OF  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  the  situation  which  irrigation  has 
reached  in  the  West  seems  to  be  something  like  this:  That  this  mat¬ 
ter  was  originally  left  to  private  enterprise,  and  the  pioneers  of  irriga¬ 
tion  selected  the  best  localities,  and  in  doing  so  were  able  to  take 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


89 


water  direct  from  streams  at  very  little  more  expense  than  is  now 
required  to  take  water  from  main  canals,  simply  because  of  the  favor¬ 
ing  conditions  After  the  most  favorable  opportunites  had  been 
reached,  then  private  enterprise  attempted  reclamation  on  a  larger 
scale.  But  the  experience  of  recent  years  has  been  that  those  large 
enterprises — the  aggregation  of  capital,  of  by  partnership  or  corpora¬ 
tions — are  unprofitable.  So  we  have  practically  reached  the  end  of 
unaided  development.  We  have  been  helped,  in  a  measure. 

Mr.  Ray.  If  that  is  true,  that  these  private  enterprises  which  have 
been  at  liberty  to  select  the  most  favorable  conditions  have  not  been 
able  to  find  it  profitable,  is  not  that  proof  conclusive  that  it  would  be 
unprofitable  and  unremunerative  to  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  to  enter  into  that  work  on  that  line,  upon  the  sale  of  lands  at 
increased  prices  for  remuneration? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  sir;  if  you  simply  take  the  monej^  received;  but 
the  Government  is  in  a  different  position  from  private  capital.  Private 
capital  derives  no  benefit  whatever  from  the  increase,  and  in  productive 
and  taxable  wealth  the  Government  derives  a  large  benefit  from  the 
population  of  the  country  that  is  now  arid  and  deserted. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Another  suggestion  there.  The  Govern¬ 
ment  would  derive  a  substantial  benefit,  financially  speaking,  indi¬ 
rectly  in  the  sale  of  its  lands,  while  the  private  individual  would 
receive  nothing  except  for  the  use  of  the  water.  That  is,  if  the  Gov¬ 
ernment,  by  conservation,  paves  the  way  for  the  sale  of  75,000,000 
acres  of  land  that  can  be  reclaimed,  the  Government  would  receive 
something  from  the  sale  of  that  75,000,000  acres  which  it  would  not 
if  they  were  left  sterile  and  unoccupied,  as  the  case  would  be  if  we 
do  not  reclaim.  So  the  Government  would  get  some  direct  compensa¬ 
tion  for  the  increased  sale  of  land  in  addition  to  the  indirect  advantages 
resulting  in  the  devolopment  of  the  country. 

Mr.  Mead.  The  Government  would  receive  certain  benefits,  as  has 
been  stated,  from  the  sale  of  the  lands  from  which  private  capital 
derives  no  benefit  whatever.  I  do  not  want  to  discuss  this  as  a  money¬ 
making  enterprise;  I  am  not  discussing  it  on  that  basis  at  all.  We 
have  substantially  reached  the  condition  I  have  stated,'  so  far  as 
development  b}"  private  enterprise  is  concerned;  yet  we  have  a  very 
large  area  of  public  lands  yet  unreclaimed  and  practically  valueless 
in  its  present  condition,  and  many  of  the  largest  rivers  are  going  to 
waste  substantially  undiminished.  That  is  a  tax  on  transportation, 
it  is  a  tax  on  commerce,  it  is  a  tax  on  the  development  of  the  East, 
which  would  be  largely  removed  if  you  could  people  that  country. 
Those  are  certain  benefits  that  will  be  derived  by  settlement  that  are 
matters  for  the  nation  to  consider. 

Now,  if  it  is  simply  a  question  of  bringing  public  lands  into  the 
market,  if  we  are  to  consider  first  of  all  the  bringing  of  public  lands 
into  the  market  and  the  reclamation  of  public  lands  at  the  least  cost, 
in  my  judgment  the  place  to  begin  would  be  to  take  these  large  rivers 
that  are  now  running  to  waste.  The  reason  they  have  not  been  used 
is  because  the  expense  of  constructing  dams  is  so  great  that  there  is 
no  hope  of  any  return  from  the  original  outlay. 

If  you  bring  those  rivers  to  the  surface  of  the  ground,  as  the  small 
streams  exist — the  streams  that  were  utilized  by  the  original  settler — 
then  settlers  will  be  willing  to  dig  out  canals  on  the  same  terms  as 
were  done,  and  will  be  able  to  do  it;  that  is,  if  you  build  these  diver¬ 
sion  works  without  hope  of  return.  You  can  bring  more  land  into 
use  by  building  dams  in  the  Missouri  and  the  Colorado,  the  Snake  and 


90 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


tlie  Green  rivers,  more  public  lands,  and  more  private  lands,  possi¬ 
bly  new  lands,  than  you  can  by  any  system  of  reservoirs,  no  matter 
what  its  cost. 

Western  development,  unrestricted  development,  has  brought  about 
a  condition  of  affairs  that  jnakes  reservoirs  of  immense  importance. 
That  condition  of  affairs  is,  that  the  variations  in  the  flow  of  W estern 
streams  do  not  accord  with  the  needs  of  irrigation.  Streams  rise  before 
irrigators  need  the  water,  and  they  escape  before  they  can  use  it  ben¬ 
eficially.  In  many  places  streams  are  torrential  in  character,  so  that 
storage  is  an  indispensable  requisite  to  the  utilization  of  the  stream. 
On  these  streams,  where  there  are  early  floods,  where  the  opportuni¬ 
ties  for  diversion  have  been  such  as  to  permit  the  construction  of  pri¬ 
vate  canals,  more  canals  have  been  built  than  there  is  water  to  fill 
them  at  the  time  it  is  needed.  There  is  more  land  under  cultivation 
than  can  be  profitably  cultivated,  which  creates  a  condition  of  very 
serious  distress  in  many  localities,  and  a  very  serious  waste  in  many 
others. 

Let  me  illustrate  that.  The  investigations  made  by  the  Depart¬ 
ment  of  Agriculture  show  that  the  demands  of  crops  in  June  and  July 
are  practically  uniform.  On  many  streams  there  is  not  5  per  cent  of 
the  water  in  July  that  there  is  in  June,  so  if  you  could  only  hold 
back  the  water  that  goes  to  waste  one  month  and  use  it  the  next 
month  you  could  double  and  treble  and  quadruple  the  acreage  of 
land  which  it  is  impossible  to  successfully  reclaim  where  you  have 
to  depend  entirely  on  the  natural  flow.  Let  us  take  the  case  of  the 
Rio  Grande,  which  carries  6,000  cubic  feet  per  second  in  May.  The 
flow  drops  down  to  only  2,000  cubic  feet  per  second  in  July.  Now, 
the  needs  of  July  are  just  as  great  as  the  needs  of  May,  or  even 
greater.  Take  another  case,  where  the  May  and  June  discharge  is 
from  12,000  to  17,000  cubic  feet  per  second,  dropping  down  below  2,000 
feet  in  July — only  one-eighth  as  much  water  in  the  stream  in  July  as 
there  is  in  June. 

Now,  that  condition  of  affairs  has  resulted  in  this:  People  seeing 
an  immense  volume  of  water  running  to  waste  in  June,  Eastern  capi¬ 
tal  has  been  invested  to  make  use  of  it,  not  realizing  that  it  is  not  the 
flood  discharge  that  measures  the  success  of  irrigation,  but  the  low- 
water  discharge,  so  that  we  have  scores  and  hundreds  of  canals  and 
thousands  of  farms  where  each  year  there  is  a  shortage  of  water,  a 
greater  or  less  loss  of  crops,  and  a  great  waste  and'  an  injurious  use 
of  water  because  of  it.  Let  me  illustrate  that  by  the  condition  of 
affairs  in  the  Salt  River  Valley.  In  the  Salt  River  Valley  in  Arizona 
it  is  known  that  practically  all  the  canals  will  have  a  short  water 
supply  in  August.  The  result  is  that  they  pour  all  the  water  they 
can  get  into  the  soil  early  in  the  season,  so  as  to  create,  as  far  as  pos¬ 
sible,  a  sort  of  a  local  reservoir  in  their  own  land;  but  that  is  injurious 
to  the  land ;  it  is  a  waste  of  the  use  of  water  if  you  are  not  in  a  posi¬ 
tion  to  use  it  to  the  best  advantage.  It  does  not  produce  the  results, 
and  then  occasionally  the  shortage  reaches  a  point  where  even  that 
sort  of  treatment  does  not  prevent  a  loss  of  crops. 

Now,  if  you  have  to  subject  yourself  to  the  same  vicissitudes  of 
drought  in  an  irrigated  region  that  3^011  have  to  where  you  depend  on 
the  clouds,  so  that  the  man  having  the  ditches  is  just  as  subject  to  a 
loss  of  crops  as  the  man  who  depends  on  the  skies,  irrigation  can  not 
maintain  itself  in  competition  with  agriculture  that  depends  on  the 
rain,  where  your  moisture  is  supplied  free  of  cost.  The  very  foun¬ 
dation  of  success  in  irrigation  is  that  you  shall  have  an  ample  water 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


91 


supply  throughout  the  season.  The  great  need  of  reservoirs  to-day 
is  to  take  these  streams  where  private  enterprise  has  already  built 
diversion  works  and  where  settlers  are  struggling  to  maintain  them¬ 
selves,  and  put  them  in  a  position  to  be  profitable  and  prosperous. 
That  means  you  are  not  to  build  ditches  on  streams,  you  are  to  build 
reservoirs  on  streams  where  the  ditches  are  already  in  existence,  where 
a  system  is  already  in  operation. 

Mr.  Mondell.  In  most  instances  that  would  also  result  in  a  com¬ 
plete  system  of  storage.  Most  any  stream  in  the  United  States  has 
enough  water  for  new  lands? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes;  let  us  take  this  case.  Practically  all  the  land  that 
can  be  practically  brought  under  cultivation  to-day  on  the  North 
Platte  is  the  land  that  they  can  depend  on  getting  water  from  the 
remaining  portion  here.  It  does  not  make  any  difference  how  much 
runs  to  waste;  it  is  not  safe  to  attempt  cultivation,  because  your  crops 
will  be  started  in  the  spring  to  be  dried  up  in  the  summer.  Now,  first 
supply  the  necessities  of  users  and  then  the  extent  of  further  develop¬ 
ments  will  depend  simply  on  the  amount  of  storage  you  can  provide 
for  the  interests  of  additional  users,  permitting  a  very  much  larger 
increased  use  of  the  early  floods. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Would  there  ever  be  a  possibility  of  ever 
storing  a  large  per  cent  of  that  surplus  water ;  could  you  give  us  some 
idea,  for  instance,  on  the  North  Platte  there,  how  much  of  that  sur¬ 
plus  might  be  stored? 

Mr.  Mead.  Each  stream  will  depend  on  the  opportunities  for  stor¬ 
ing.  Those  vary  greatly.  On  some  streams  the  opportunities  will 
permit  of  a  complete  utilization  of  the  entire  flow.  On  other  streams 
this  will  not  be  possible.  There  are  streams  where  you  could  utilize 
the  entire  supply,  and  there  are  many  other  streams  where  the  attempt 
to  answer  this  question  would  be  merely  a  case  of  lack  of  definite 
information  as  to  the  size  of  storage  works. 

Mr.  Wilson.  It  is  hardly  likely  the  flood  waters  of  the  Platte  would 
be  stored? 

Mr.  Mead.  I  think  they  could  be;  I  think  that  is  a  stream  that 
could.  I  think  the  Snake  River  could  by  impounding  in  Jackson 
Hole.  That  of  itself  now  serves  as  a  sort  of  a  reservoir. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  wish  to  call  your  attention,  Mr.  Mead,  to  the 
fact  that  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  the  supply  to  existing  ditches 
under  this  bill. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  understand  that;  I  am  simply  explaining  the  situation. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  would  like  to  call  your  attention  to  one  proposi¬ 
tion.  Assuming  that  you  start  with  this  reclamation  fund,  and  the 
reclamation  of  the  West  depends  on  keeping  that  fund  good  and  even 
increasing  it,  how  would  you,  if  you  simply  turned  the  water  into  the 
streams,  obtajn  an  increase  of  that  fund? 

Mr.  Mead.  If  you  will  permit  me  to  complete  the  discussion  I  am 
making  I  will  take  that  up  later.  The  situation  which  confronts  the 
Government  in  taking  up  this  matter  it  seems  to  me  is  this:  That 
you  can  not  build  dams  in  these  great  rivers  and  then  let  the  people 
build  the  canals  without  any  interference  with  local  institutions.  YT>u 
would  not  expect  to  build  a  dam  and  get  any  revenue  from  it.  These 
reservoirs  will  be  located  largely  on  streams  where  ditches  are  already 
in  operation,  where  those  ditches  have  certain  rights  under  State  laws, 
where  there  is  a  system  of  administration.  In  Colorado  there  are 
about  100  officers  who  raise  and  lower  these  head  gates,  so  that  the 
rights  of  the  different  proprietors  of  water  under  State  laws  are  pro- 


92 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


tected;  in  Wyoming  about  40  or  50;  in  Nebraska  the  same  number 
or  a  less  number.  Now,  if  the  Government  builds  storage  works,  just 
as  it  would  build  dams,  just  as  they  build  docks  as  a  means  of  regu¬ 
lating  the  flow  of  the  stream  and  permitting  a  larger  use,  and  make 
no  attempt  to  charge,  there  comes  no  interference  or  conflict  between 
what  the  Government  is  doing  and  what  the  State  has  already  done; 
but  if  the  Government  makes  the  attempt  to  collect  revenue  and 
derive  a  return  from  this  water  in  order  to  market  its  goods  and  col¬ 
lect  its  rental,  it  must  be  in  a  position  to  protect  that  water  when  it  is 
turned  into  the  channels  of  the  natural  streams,  and  that  means 
they  must  have  some  authority  to  raise  and  lower  those  head  gates  in 
those  streams. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  will  ask  you  where  a  private  individual  now 
stores  water  is  there  not  a  law  in  most  of  the  States  by  which  he  can 
deliver  that  stored  water  at  any  point  on  the  stream  that  he  wishes? 

Mr.  Mead.  And  compel  the  State  officers  to  regulate  the  head  gates 
in  accordance  with  it? 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  do  not  know  about  the  latter,  but  is  there  not  a 
law  which  gives  the  man  a  right  to  store  water  and  the  use  of  thericer 
channel  to  carry  it  where  he  wishes?  And  if  that  were  so,  would  not 
that  law  protect  the  United  States,  if  it  was  the  owner  of  the  stored 
water,  the  same  as  it  would  protect  an  individual? 

Mr.  Mead.  There  is  only  one  law. 

Mr.  Newlands.  There  is  such  a  law  in  Nevada. 

Mr.  Mead.  But  Nevada  has  no  officials  to  regulate  the  head  gates. 
There  is  only  one  State  that  has;  that  is  Colorado. 

To  go  back.  I  have  no  objection  to  the  principle  of  rentals,  no 
objection  to  that  at  all.  I  think  it  would  be  perfectly  proper  if  a 
State,  considering  water  public  property  in  a  stream,  should  charge 
for  it.  It  is  not  the  principle  of  rentals,  but  it  is  the  question  of  work-  ‘ 
ing  out  a  sj'stem  by  which  the  Government  will  collect  its  rentals 
without  interference  or  disturbance  of  existing  State  rights  that  needs 
to  be  brought  to  your  attention  and  needs  to  be  carefully  considered  ■ 
in  any  legislation  on  this  matter.  I  am  not  saying  that  this  can  not 
be  done,  but  I  am  saying,  and  I  want  every  member  of  this  committee 
to  regard  that  as  an  essential  and  important  feature  of  this  legislation, 
that  you  do  not  want  to  enter  on  this  legislation  without  giving  that 
matter  careful  consideration  and  working  out  some  adequate  and 
definite  plan. 

Mr.  Mondell.  That  is,  providing  the  committee  proposes  a  charge? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Do  you  not  think  that  things  could  be  worked  out 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  with  the  assistance  of  the  Geological 
Survey  and  the  Agricultural  Department,  better  than  Congress  itself 
by  rules  and  regulations? 

Mr.  Mead.  I  think  it  ought  to  be  worked  out  before  any  legislation 
is  enacted,  before  you  determine  which  of  these  two  policies  you  adopt. 

Mr.  King.  Yet  the  ideal  condition  would  be,  in  your  opinion,  would 
it  not,  that  if  the  Government  itself  invests  here  for  the  purpose  of 
creating  these  reservoirs  and  conserving  the  water,  that  they  should 
get  rid  of  the  reservoirs  as  soon  as  possible — turn  them  over  to  State 
control  or  to  private  individuals? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes;  I  think  so;  if  satisfied  that  the  States  had  enacted 
laws  that  would  satisfy  the  Government. 

In  this  matter  of  rental  I  fully  agree  with  the  idea  embodied  in  Mr. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


93 


Newlands’s  bill,  that  the  revenues  arising  by  the  provisions  of  this  bill 
should  go  for  the  betterment  of  these  States;  that  the  disadvantages 
under  which  those  people  live,  the  drawbacks  that  nature  has  imposed 
on  that  country  in  this  deficiency  of  moisture,  entitle  them  to  that 
consideration.  They  are  entitled  to  it  because  the  conditions  of  many 
of  those  States  make  aid  of  that  kind  necessary. 

The  facts  pointed  out  by  the  gentleman  who  spoke  first,  that  Arizona 
has  54,000,000  acres  of  public  lands  and  that  these  other  States  all 
have  somewhere  near  like  amounts,  entitle  those  States  to  be  benefited 
as  far  as  possible  by  the  transactions  of  the  Government  in  public 
lands;  because  the  State  derives  nothing  whatever  in  the  way  of 
rentals  and  taxes  from  those  public  lands ;  they  have  to  administer 
law  and  order,  to  maintain  local  self-government  over  empires  in 
extent,  the  greater  part  of  which  belongs  to  the  Government — a  Gov¬ 
ernment  that  at  the  present  time  stands  in  the  way  of  an  alien  land¬ 
lord,  that  makes  no  homes,  and  pays  no  taxes.  That  is  a  condition 
of  affairs  that  makes  me  indorse  thoroughly  the  idea  that  whatever 
revenues  there  are  ought  to  go  to  the  building  of  irrigation  works  for 
the  development  of  that  country  and  the  transfer  of  them  from  public 
to  private  hands. 

Regarding  revenues  anywhere,  to  depend  on  the  operation  of  the 
homestead  law  we  can  not  expect  any  continuous  revenue  running 
over  a  long  period  of  years — that  is,  any  adequate  revenue  for  the 
work  before  us;  but  there  are  between  300,000,000  and  400,000,000 
acres  of  grazing  lands,  lands  that  never  will  be  susceptible  of  home¬ 
stead  entiy,  that  can  not  be  filed  as  homesteads  now  without  a  man 
perjures  himself — because  you  can  not  make  a  homestead  out  of  them; 
in  many  cases  a  horned  toad  can  not  live  on  them  in  their  present  con¬ 
dition,  and  it  would  take  a  township  to  support  a  settler  and  his  family. 
I  do  not  believe  that  land  is  going  to  be  left  forever  in  its  present  con¬ 
dition,  that  everybody  can  use  as  he  pleases,  because  there  will  be  certain 
things  in  the  future  that  are  going  to  make  the  range  stockman  and 
the  settlers  that  use  it  now  as  a  free  common,  demand  some  protection 
and  some  settled  policy  regarding  its  occupation.  If  we  begin  the 
construction  of  irrigation  works,  even  the  crippled  population  it  has 
will  make  the  competition  for  that  land  so  fierce  that  it  is  going  to  be 
a  question  of  self-preservation  and  the  maintenance  of  local  peace 
that  there  be  some  provision  dealing  with  the  grazing  lands  as  well 
as  the  other  lands.  Whatever  is  done,  whether  those  lands  are 
disposed  of,  whether  they  are  leased,  or  whatever  is  done,  every  cent 
that  comes  from  those  should  go  into  the  irrigation  fund.  When  you 
deal  with  that  question  you  have  opened  up  a  source  of  revenue  many 
times  greater  than  anything  we  will  get  from  the  occupation  of  the 
land  through  the  present  land  laws.  So  I  believe  for  the  next  ten  or 
fifteen  years,  even  if  we  abandon  the  question  of  direct  compensation, 
we  would  have  a  revenue  large  enough  to  enable  the  Government  to 
carry  on  this  development  in  a  substantial  measure  from  the  proceeds 
of  lands  alone. 

(Thereupon,  at  12  o’clock,  the  committee  adjourned  until  4  o’clock 
p.  m.) 

Washington,  D.  C.,  February  7,  1901. 

The  committee  met  at  4  o’clock  p.  m,,  Hon.  Thomas  H.  Tongue  in 
the  chair. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Maxwell  is  here,  and  as  Professor  Mead  has 
not  come  in  we  might  listen  to  Mr.  Maxwell. 


94 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


STATEMENT  OF  GEORGE  H.  MAXWELL,  CHAIRMAN  OF  EXECUTIVE 
COMMITTEE  OF  NATIONAL  IRRIGATION  ASSOCIATION. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  wish  to  speak  of  the  Newlands  bill,  No.  14088. 
I  think  a  good  name  for  that  bill  would  be  to  call  it  the  “omnibus 
bill.”  As  we  came  in,  Mr.  Chairman,  yon  referred  to  this  matter,  and 
to  the  point  that  the  Government  had  expended  during  a  period  of 
years  a  large  amount  of  money  for  preliminary  work  along  the  lines 
of  this  irrigation  matter,  and  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that  after  fifteen 
or  twenty  years  of  Government  investigation  we  are  no  further  along 
than  we  were  at  the  beginning,  so  far  as  the  actuhl  reclamation  of  the 
land  is  concerned.  An  immense  fund  of  valuable  information  has 
been  developed,  and  the  time  is  ripe  for  action.  Under  this  bill  to 
which  I  refer,  the  Government  can  begin  action  immediately,  and  I 
believe  along  lines  which  remove  every  reasonable  objection  which 
has  ever  been  raised  to  the  Government  undertaking  the  great  work 
of  bringing  about  the  reclamation  of  the  arid  domain. 

The  first  point  which  it  seems  to  me  is  important  in  favor  of  the 
Newlands  bill  is  that  under  it  everything  can  be  done  which  is  sug¬ 
gested  to  be  done  by  each  of  the  other  bills  now  before  this  commit¬ 
tee.  For  instance,  Mr.  Wilson  has  a  bill  for  the  construction  of  the 
San  Carlos  reservoir  in  Arizona.  There  is  also  an  item  of  appropria¬ 
tion  in  the  Indian  bill  of  $100,000  to  make  further  soundings  to  the 
bed  rock  and  to  segregate  the  land.  If  that  item  passes,  that  part  is 
provided  for,  but  if  not,  a  reservoir  could  be  built  under  the  New¬ 
lands  bill  without  any  further  legislation.  Mr.  Mondell  has  intro¬ 
duced  a  measure  which  provides  that  the  fund  derived  from  the  sale 
of  public  lands  may  be  used  for  the  survey  and  construction  of  irri¬ 
gation  works.  As  I  understand,  it  is  not  contemplated  in  his  idea, 
or  bill,  that  any  of  the  moneys  expended  should  be  returned,  and 
his  bill  does  not  provide  for  any  construction  work,  but  merely  for  pre¬ 
liminary  surveys.  So  that  all  that  is  provided  for  under  Mr.  Mondell’s 
bill  can  be  done  under  Mr.  Newlands’s  bill,  No.  14088. 

Mr.  Mondell.  My  bill  provides  for  a  specific  report,  and  of  course 
any  question  as  to  what  should  be  done — as  to  whether  the  Govern¬ 
ment  should  receive  a  return  for  its  expenditures — would  be  a  question 
which  would  be  raised  when  the  specific  propositions  came  up. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  That  would  require  further  Congressional  action 
under  your  bill.  Everything  that  can  be  done,  practically,  under 
your  bill  can  be  done  practically  under  Mr.  Newlands’s  bill  without 
further  legislation.  The  bill  to  which  especially  my  attention  has 
been  called  is  one  of  Judge  Barham’s,  providing  for  the  complete 
investigation  and  survey  of  the  arid  domain.  That  bill  is  a  thor¬ 
oughly  well-considered  bill  to  the  point  to  which  it  goes,  but  it  does 
not  go  to  the  point  of  allowing  construction  to  begin.  Under  the 
Newlands  bill  the  survej^s  provided  for  by  Mr.  Barham’s  bill  can  be 
made,  and  construction  can  be  begun. 

Mr.  Barham.  Is  there  a  project  now  so  completely  examined  and 
surveyed  and  estimated  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  could  let  a 
contract  under  this  bill? 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  understand  that  complete  plans  and  surveys  have 
been  made  by  the  Geological  Survey,  and  those  plans  and  surveys  are 
now  printed  in  the  reports  of  the  Geological  Survey.  I  will  ask  Mr. 
Newell  if  that  is  not  so. 

Mr.  Newell.  We  have  printed  the  plans  and  estimates  for  several 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


95 


projects,  two  or  three  in  Nevada  and  several  in  California;  also  the 
plans  for  the  San  Carlos  dam,  on  Gila  River,  and  those  for  the  diver¬ 
sion  of  St.  Mary  River  into  the  head  of  Milk  River  in  Montana.  These 
plans  have  been  made  for  ascertaining  the  cost;  for  actual  construc¬ 
tion  additional  details  should  be  worked  out.  For  example,  in  con¬ 
nection  with  the  San  Carlos  dam,  on  Gila  River,  we  should  uncover 
the  foundations  in  order  to  make  additional  drawings  and  specifica¬ 
tions.  When  we  have  investigated  the  conditions  there  and  settled 
on  the  exact  position,  we  will  be  ready  to  go  further. 

Mr.  Mondell.  You  want  to  investigate  there  as  to  the  exact  loca¬ 
tion  of  the  dam? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir;  it  is  a  question  of  a  few  feet  up  or  down  the 
river. 

Mr.  Barham.  The  plans  and  specifications  are  not  complete? 

Mr.  Newell.  The  $100,000  item  which  has  just  been  passed  for  that 
purpose  by  the  Senate  in  the  Indian  bill  provides  several  things :  To 
continue  the  investigation  as  to  particular  details,  to  acquire  the  dam 
site,  and  to  ascertain  what  the  benefits  will  be,  as  well  as  the  cost,  and 
to  lay  the  scheme  out  in  all  its  relations  to  development  of  that  part 
of  the  country. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  What  I  intended  to  say  was  that  under  this  bill 
which  I  have  before  me,  Mr.  Newlands’s  bill,  a  report  would  be  required 
to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  with  a  complete  plan,  estimate,  and 
survey,  upon  which  he  would  determine  whether  he  would  order  con¬ 
struction.  I  suppose  that  in  making  reports  of  that  kind,  any  surveys 
heretofore  made  by  the  departments  could  be  utilized  without  the 
necessity  of  doing  new  work. 

In  the  bill  there  is,  first,  the  provision  for  setting  aside  the  fund ; 
second,  the  provision  for  preliminary  surveys,  plans,  and  estimates  of 
cost;  third,  for  the  making  of  a  report,  through  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  showing  all  the  details  in  reference  to  the  imposition;  fourth, 
the  power  vested  in  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  order  the  con¬ 
struction  of  certain  works  upon  certain  conditions,  one  of  which  is 
that  no  contract  shall  be  let  until  the  necessary  funds  are  available. 
Another  is  that  where  lands  are  to  be  irrigated  under  any  one  of  these 
S37stems,  such  lands  shall  be  withdrawn  from  all  other  entry  except 
entry  under  the  homestead  act,  the  idea  being  that  in  the  absence  of 
such  provision  the  speculators  would  immediate^  jump  in  and  locate 
scrip  or  make  some  other  sort  of  speculative  entries,  which  is  against 
the  policy  of  this  legislation,  its  object  being  really  to  create  homes 
on  the  public  domain,  and  to  settle  it.  The  act  provides  that  where 
the  construction  is  ordered  the  cost  of  the  work  shall  return  to  the 
Treasury  through  the  funds  derived  from  the  use  of  the  water.  This 
would  make  a  charge  upon  the  land. 

The  great  advantage  of  this  bill  is  that  there  is  not  a  section  in  the 
West,  from  Arizona  to  Idaho,  and  California,  and  Nebraska,  whose 
needs  are  not  full}7  provided,  with  the  single  exception -that  where 
conditions  exist  under  which  it  is  not  feasible  for  the  Federal  Gov¬ 
ernment  to  build  the  canals  and  reservoirs  and  get  its  money  back 
from  the  use  of  the  water,  under  those  conditions  a  further  applica¬ 
tion  must  be  made  to  Congress.  There  is  absolutely  nothing  which 
you  must  do  to  accomplish  a  reclamation  of  the  arid  lands,  which  can 
and  ought  to  be  done  by  the  Federal  Government,  that  can  not  be 
done  under  this  bill,  with  the  exception  of  those  projects  in  localities 
where  the  conditions  are  such  that  for  some  cause  the  Government 
can  not  build  a  reservoir  and  get  its  money  back  from  the  use  of  the 


96 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


water.  It  is  hardly  a  just  illustration  with  reference  to  the  bill  to  take 
that  condition  as  the  only  condition  for  consideration. 

There  are  a  great  multitude  of  places  where  the  Federal  Govern¬ 
ment  can  build  reservoirs,  and  can  build  main-line  canals,  and  can  so 
connect  the  source  and  supply  of  the  water  with  the  lands  on  which 
it  is  to  be  used  that  there  is  no  possibility  of  complication  coming 
about.  It  permits  the  Geological  Survey,  which  of  all  the  depart¬ 
ments  of  the  Government  is  the  proper  department  to  make  these 
investigations,  to  make  them.  If  the  Survey  finds  that  the  Govern¬ 
ment  can  build  a  reservoir  and  canal  to  the  Government  lands,  and 
possibly  also  to  intervening  private  lands,  and  that  the  enterprise  is 
practicable,  it  can  so  report,  and  if  there  is  such  a  place  as  that  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  authorized  to  go  ahead.  If  the  Geological 
Survey  reports  difficulties,  by  reason  of  complications  in  regard  to 
water  rights,  laws,  or  anything  else,  so  that  in  that  particular  location 
the  Federal  Government  could  not  get  its  money  back,  then  an  addi¬ 
tional  application  must  be  made  to  Congress. 

Mr.  Barham.  I  wish  you  would  explain  to  me  the  meaning  of 
the  sixth  section  of  this  bill,  which  says  that  £  £  upon  the  completion 
of  each  storage  or  irrigation  project  the  cost  thereof  shall  be  ascer¬ 
tained,  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  prescribe  such  rules 
and  regulations  as  to  the  prices  of  land  £  entered  or  to  be  entered  ’  and 
the  right  to  the  use  of  the  water,”  and  so  forth.  Now,  that  contem¬ 
plates  the  use  of  the  water  only  upon  public  lands,  does  it  not? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  think  not.  ££And  the  right  to  use  the  water  pro¬ 
vided  by  such  work” — I  think  that  is  intended  to  cover  both  private 
and  public  lands. 

Mr.  Barham.  How  could  you  read  it  without  ££  entered  or  to  be  en¬ 
tered  ” — to  leave  those  out — and  put  the  construction  you  had  upon  it? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  If  there  is  any  ambiguity  there  it  should  be  reme¬ 
died,  because  there  are  places,  and  many  of  them,  where  there  are 
intervening  private  lands,  and  the  private  lands  and  Government 
lands  are  together,  like  the  squares  on  a  checkerboard,  and  unless  you 
can  provide  that  the  private  land  should  have  its  share,  and  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  should  have  its  share  of  the  water,  you  would  get  into  diffi¬ 
culties  about  the  distribution  of  the  water. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Section  6  is  intended  to  give  to  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior  the  power  to  make  rules  and  regulations  not  only  as  to 
the  prices  of  water  but  the  prices  of  the  land  itself  in  case  it  should 
be  regarded  as  advisable  to  put  into  the  price  of  the  land  the  cost  of 
the  enterprise,  whatever  it  might  be,  so  as  to  get  the  entire  cost  out 
by  a  reasonable  price  placed  upon  the  land.  The  words  ££  entered  or 
to  be  entered  ”  mean  not  only  the  entries  to  be  made  in  the  future  as 
to  the  making  of  the  contract,  but  the  entries  made  from  the  filing  of 
the  report  up  to  the  beginning  of  the  contract,  for  it  is  declared  in 
the  preceding  section  that  all  lands  entered  after  the  filing  of  the 
report  are  to  be  subject  to  the  charges  and  rules  made  by  this  act. 

Mr.  Barham.  Subject  to  the  entry  of  the  land.  What  was  in  my 
mind  was  railroad  land.  Of  course,  we  must  treat  that  subject. 

Mr.  Newlands.  This  clause  only  applies  to  the  price  of  the  public 
land.  It  is  provided  that  the  price  for  water  for  use  on  the  railroad 
lands  and  other  lands  in  private  ownership  shall  be  sufficient  to  repay 
the  cost  of  conservation. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  That  is  in  clause  7.  Between  them  it  is  provided 
that  the  right  to  use  the  water  on  the  land  is  restricted  to  80  acres — • 
that  is,  no  one  landowner  can  have  more  than  80  acres.  That  is 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


97 


intended  to  cover  the  conditions  in  Arizona  to-day  in  the  Salt  River 
Valley,  where  settlers  have  gone  in  and  taken  up  Government  lands. 
Here  will  be  a  quarter  section  of  Government  land,  and  here  is  a  quar¬ 
ter  section  which  is  settled,  which  has  been  taken  up,  the  next  is  open. 
If  it  is  possible  for  the  Government  to  provide  the  water  there  and  allow 
the  settlers  to  have  the  water  on  their  land  as  well  as  giving  it  to  the 
Government  land,  it  will  not  complicate  matters  at  all.  The  advan¬ 
tage  in  this  bill  is  shown  in  a  place  like  the  Salt  River  Valley  in  Ari¬ 
zona,  taking  the  Tonto  Basin  as  an  example.  I  use  these  examples  to 
show  that  I  am  not  theorizing.  Suppose  the  Government  should  build 
the  Tonto  Basin  reservoir.  It  will  hold  800,000  acre-feet  of  water  and 
it  will  irrigate  a  very  considerable  area  of  Government  land,  and  also 
provide  just  what  the  people  cultivating  the  little  farms  around  Phoe¬ 
nix  need  to  save  them  from  dying  out  as  they  are  doing  now.  They 
require  a  little  water  late  in  the  season.  The  Geological  Survey  could 
go  into  that  community,  devise  a  plan  whereby  this  water  could  be 
taken  out  and  utilized  by  the  community,  and  which  would  increase 
the  area  of  the  Government  land  irrigable  and  would  turn  the  money 
received  back  into  the  reclamation  fund.  You  could  say  to  those 
people,  “Now,  if  you  will  make  a  proposition  so  that  you  can  take 
this  water  from  the  Government  as  a  cooperative  scheme,  or  in  any 
way  that  will  avoid  complication,  we  will  build  this  reservoir.” 

There  are  hundreds  of  places  in  the  West  to-day  where,  if  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  would  indicate  its  willingness  to  supply  water  to  settlers — 
and  to-day  they  have  no  possibility  of  getting  water  from  private 
enterprise — they  would  make  any  desired  conditions  in  the  way  of 
shaping  their  claims  to  water  rights  and  methods  of  distribution  so  as 
to  relieve  the  Federal  Government  of  every  possible  complication. 
These  difficulties  suggested  here  are  the  results  of  the  work  of  the 
student  in  the  closet.  You  can  go  on  the  ground  in  every  case  and 
plan  a  way  to  avoid  them. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  would  like  to  interrupt  you  there  just  a  moment. 
I  do  not  know  that  I  am  a  student  in  a  closet.  My  work  has  been  in 
actual  construction - 

Mr.  Maxwell.  It  has  been  in  Wyoming,  Mr.  Mondell. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  don’t  know — I  have  constructed  irrigation  canals 
personally  in  several  States  and  Territories,  and  I  do  not  think  I  have 
ever  been  a  closet  student  of  this  subject.  But  referring  to  the 
matter  you  have  just  suggested  there,  if  it  is  a  fact  that  in  the  places 
you  have  just  referred  to  there  is  no  question  about  the  return  from 
the  building  of  these  reservoirs  either  to  the  Government  or  the  indi¬ 
vidual  building  the  reservoir,  in  a  case  of  that  kind  there  is  nothing 
to  prevent  the  individual  from  going  ahead  and  building  those  reser¬ 
voirs  and  getting  a  return  from  them. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  They  have  been  trying  for  ten  j^ears  to  get  private 
capital  to  build  those  reservoirs,  and  they  have  hoped  against  hope, 
and  made  trial  after  trial,  for  such  a  long  time  that  they  have  now 
just  about  given  up. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Then,  if  private  enterprise,  after  carefully  consider¬ 
ing  it,  has  given  it  up,  that  means  that  it  is  not  feasible,  and  it  can 
not  be  made  to  pay. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  That  is  an  important  point  and  one  which  should 
be  emphasized  in  this  connection.  Private  capital  can  not  conserve 
water  so  that  it  can  be  made  to  pay,  and  this  is  one  of  the  strongest 
arguments  why  the  Government  must  take  up  the  matter.  It  is  rec- 

11196—01 - 7 


.98 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


ognized  by  all  that  the  water  must  be  conserved ;  that  the  reservoirs 
must  be  built,  and  large  streams  diverted  if  we  are  to  make  available 
the  fertile  but  arid  lands.  Private,  enterprise  has  already  made  the 
experiment  and  has  demonstrated  that  it  will  not  pay  from  a  financial 
standpoint;  that  is,  as  regards  immediate  profits  and  interest  on  bonds 
and  stock. 

The  investor  or  speculator  looks  at  these  matters  solely  from  the 
standpoint  of  profit,  and  not  from  that  of  the  greatest  good  to  the 
greatest  number.  If,  for  example,  under  a  given  project  water  can 
be  conserved  to  supply  500,000  acres  with  a  net  profit  of  5  per  cent  on 
the  original  investment,  or  a  similar  system  will  reclaim  only  300,000 
acres,  but  yield  a  profit  of  8  per  cent  on  the  investment,  the  capitalist 
will  not  hesitate  to  adopt  the  latter,  although  by  so  doing  200,000  acres 
of  good  land  are  left  sterile  and  opportunities  for  home-making  on 
this  land  are  forever  destroyed. 

In  the  case  of  reclamation  by  the  Government,  however,  the  ques¬ 
tion  of  immediate  profits  and  of  a  tempting  interest  return  is  not  con¬ 
sidered.  The  matter  of  time,  also,  is  not  one  always  pressing;  and 
if  it  is  necessary  to  wait  ten  or  even  twenty  years  before  all  of  the 
reclaimed  land  is  disposed  of,  there  is  not  the  ever-threatening  bank¬ 
ruptcy,  such  as  is  involved  in  a  speculative  enterprise,  where  the 
lands  or  conserved  waters  are  not  disposed  of  at  once. 

When  a  corporation  has  undertaken  such  work,  the  funds  raised  for 
preliminary  surveys  and  investigations  are  expected  to  be  refunded, 
with  interest,  from  a  time  antedating  the  survey.  In  this  way  the 
money  invested  for  construction  must  ultimately  pay  interest  from  a 
period  preceding  the  laying  of  a  stone.  If  for  any  cause  the  work  is 
delayed  or  the  settlers  become  discouraged  and  do  not  take  up  the 
land  rapidly,  the  interest  charge,  running  day  and  night,  increases 
the  cost,  and,  as  has  been  frequently  the  case,  the  bondholders  must 
step  in  and  take  the  enterprise,  reorganizing  upon  a  different  basis. 
These  reorganizations  are  again  discouraging  to  the  settler  and  involve 
additional  expense,  and  so  these  enterprises,  financially  considered, 
have  been  failures,  although  of  great  benefit  to  the  country  when  con¬ 
sidered  from  other  standpoints. 

In  the  case  of  Government  construction,  the  conditions  are  far  more 
simple.  They  are  along  the  line  of  reclaiming  the  largest  possible 
area  of  arid  land  at  a  cost  commensurate  with  the  ultimate  value  of 
the  reclaimed  land,  and  with  the  probability  of  ultimate  return  of  the 
cost  without  reference  to  interest  on  stock  or  bonds.  If  ten  or  even 
twenty  years  are  required  for  the  gradual  settlement  of  the  country 
and  the  disposal  of  the  water,  there  is  no  anxiety  nor  loss,  since  expe¬ 
rience  demonstrates  that  the  conserved  water  and  the  reclaimed  land 
is  slowly  but  steadily  attaining  a  higher  and  higher  value. 

While  the  interest  charges  are  not  considered  on  the  funds  thus 
invested,  yet  the  Government  is  by  no  means  the  loser,  as  the  indirect 
gain  through  the  increase  of  population  and  of  taxable  property  far 
more  than  compensates  for  any  interest  charges. 

If  a  corporation  could  be  put  in  the  position  of  the  Government,  as 
the  owner  of  vast  quantities  of  land,  with  vital  interest  in  the  welfare 
and  prosperity  of  the  people,  there  could  be  no  hesitation  in  consider¬ 
ing  the  reclamation  of  these  lands  as  one  of  the  best  of  business  enter¬ 
prises;  but  with  the  existing  condition  of  things  under  a  democratic 
government  the  corporation  can  receive,  not  the  multitude  of  indirect 
benefits,  but  only  a  profit  along  one  narrow  line. 

In  the  localities  concerning  which  I  have  spoken  they  have  been 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


99 


trying  for  years  to  induce  private  capital  to  complete  these  reservoirs; 
but  it  is  impossible  to  demonstrate  how  private  capital  can  receive 
an  adequate  return  for  the  risks  involved.  There  is  no  class  of 
property  which  is  considered  more  uncertain  than  irrigation  bonds 
and  stock,  owing  to  the  gigantic  frauds  which  have  been  perpetrated 
within  recent  years.  Capital  can  not  be  induced  to  go  into  this  work 
of  conservation  unless  extraordinary  profits  can  be  shown,  and  these 
are  not  possible;  even  if  they  were,  it  would  not  be  a  matter  of  sound 
public  policy  to  make  of  a  public  utility  of  this  kind  a  speculation 
such  as  would  load  down  settlers  with  inflated  debts. 

The  Chairman.  Mr.  Maxwell,  are  you  going  to  remain  in  the  city 
for  some  time?  I  ask  because  we  have  Mr.  Mead  here  now,  and  it 
was  our  intention  to  hear  from  him  to-day. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Certainly,  if  Mr.  Mead  is  here  I  prefer  to  give  way 
to  him. 

STATEMENT  OF  ELWOOD  MEAD,  IRRIGATION  EXPERT  OF  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  have  no  desire  to  say  anything  more  than  I  have 
already  said  to-day. 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  suggest  that  it  would  be  a  more  orderly  proceed¬ 
ing  to  have  Mr.  Mead  conclude  his  remarks,  and  then  have  Mr.  Max¬ 
well  take  up  the  subject  again. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  really  have  nothing  further  to  say. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Have  you  looked  over  this  bill  since  our  adjourn¬ 
ment? 

Mr.  King.  I  would  like  to  have  Professor  Mead  discuss  the  best 
mode  of  reclaiming  the  arid  land  and  at  the  least  possible  cost,  and 
to  have  his  opinion  as  to  the  most  practicable  and  feasible  scheme, 
and  the  one  that  will  address  itself  to  the  judgment  of  Congress  and 
be  the  best  calculated  to  receive  the  support  of  the  people  who  do  not 
live  in  the  West. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  should  hesitate  to  undertake  that  without  preparing 
for  it.  It  is  a  pretty  big  subject;  I  think  it  would  take  more  time 
than  I  imagine  the  committee  could  devote  to  it  this  evening.  I  would 
be  very  glad  to  do  that,  but  I  should  not  want  to  undertake  it  and 
have  to  feel  that  I  had  dealt  with  it  inadequately. 

Mr.  King.  I  would  like  to  ask  you,  do  you  think  that  a  cession  of 
all  the  arid  lands  in  all  of  the  States  to  the  States  would  prove  a  solu¬ 
tion  of  this  question? 

Mr.  Mondell.  Why  not  the  mineral  lands  also? 

Mr.  King.  Well,  we  have  here  only  jurisdiction  of  the  public  lands, 
and  to  open  that  subject  would  provoke  a  storm  of  controversy  that 
is  not  necessary  to  be  raised  yet. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  would  answer  that  in  this  way,  that  I  believe  a  prop¬ 
erly  guarded  cession,  which  would  prevent  an  improper  use  of  these 
lands,  would  serve  the  same  purpose  as  national  legislation.  It  would 
have  to  be  properly  guarded  legislation;  legislation  that  would  provide 
for  a  cession  in  trust;  and  I  would  say  further  that  no  answer  could 
be  made  that  would  not  have  to  have  some  limitations. 

Mr.  Newlands.  What  limitations? 

Mr.  Mead.  There  are  States  in  which  a  cession  of  the  lands  would 
answer  every  jiurpose.  There  are  States  in  which  irrigation  is  an 
important  interest;  there  are  States  that  have  paid  a  great  deal  of 
attention  to  this  matter  and  have  laws  for  dealing  with  the  matter. 


100 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


A  cession  of  lands  to  those  States,  I  believe,  would  be  the  most  effect¬ 
ive  and  the  simplest  solution  of  the  question.  There  are  other  States 
where  the  irrigation  is  not  of  first  importance  that  have  no  adequate 
irrigation  laws,  and  where  this  interest  would  not  receive  proper  con¬ 
sideration.  A  cession  to  those  States  without  some  adequate  safe¬ 
guards  would  be  improper. 

Mr.  Reeder.  Do  you  think  there  are  any  of  these  States  that  would 
handle  the  lands  better  than  the  Interior  Department  or  the  Govern¬ 
ment? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Reeder.  You  think  there  are  States  that  would  handle  the 
land  to  better  advantage? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  sir.  Do  not  understand  me  to  say  that  they  would 
handle  them  more  honestly. 

Mr.  Reeder.  They  handle  them  more  efficiently  on  account  of  their 
machinery? 

Mr.  Mead.  They  would  handle  them  better. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Take  several  cases  in  Nevada  and  California. 
Take  the  Truckee  Valley  and  the  Carson,  where  the  lands  irrigated 
are  in  Nevada  and  the  storage  sites  are  in  California.  Do  you  think 
a  cession  of  those  lands  to  Nevada  would  enable  the  State  of  Nevada 
to  conduct  the  necessary  operations  to  reclaim  those  lands? 

Mr.  Mead.  Suppose  the  Government  goes  into  California  now  and 
builds  a  reservoir,  it  will  have  to  provide  by  legislation  for  the  regu¬ 
lation  of  the  stream  between  those  two  States,  and  there  will  have  to 
be  legislation  of  that  kind  anyway,  and  it  will  .require  some  additional 
legislation. 

Mr.  Newlands.  There  will  be  no  regulation  of  the  stream  between 
those  two  States  in  the  case  of  California  and  Nevada,  because  in  Cal¬ 
ifornia  the  streams  are  dashing  streams — swift  mountain  streams,  you 
know — and  there  is  no  purpose  to  be  accomplished  by  the  regulation 
of  flow  there. 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Barham.  Do  you  not  think  that  if  Congress  would  pass  a  regu¬ 
lation  for  the  reclaiming  of  lands  in  Nevada  they  could  go  into  Cali¬ 
fornia  and  erect  reservoirs? 

The  Chairman.  Nevada  could  not  do  it;  I  am  discussing  now 
simply  the  ceding  of  lands  to  Nevada. 

Mr.  Mead.  The  question  asked  me  was  with  respect  to  the  manage¬ 
ment  of  the  lands. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Mead.  What  I  was  referring  to  in  the  case  of  the  lands  was 
this,  that  there  is  one  class  of  lands  at  the  present  time  that  is  not 
being  managed  at  all,  and  that  is  the  grazing  lands.  There  are  sev¬ 
eral  hundred  millions  of  acres  of  lands  that  never  can  be  and  never  will 
be  cultivated.  They  are  too  rough  and  broken,  and  there  is  no  water 
for  them,  and  there  is  no  management  or  any  provision  for  manage¬ 
ment  of  them  at  the  present  time.  I  believe  the  States  as  a  whole 
would  deal  with  that  question  better  than  it  is  being  dealt  with  now, 
but  possibly  some  States  would  deal  with  it  worse,  because  a  bad  man¬ 
agement  is  worse  than  no  management. 

.  Mr.  King.  There  is  no  management  at  all  now? 

Mr.  Mead.  No,  sir.  I  think  ultimately  the  Government  will  do 
something  with  all  these  lands.  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  prospect 
of  the  lands  ever  being  turned  over  to  the  States  if  the  Government 
goes  into  the  work  of  reclamation.  It  will  handle  the  lands. 

Mr.  Barham.  What  I  wanted  to  get  at  by  my  question  is  this:  We 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


101 


have  been  trying  to  study  this  question  for  about  six  years  here,  and 
we  were  all  originally  of  the  opinion  that  the  lands  ought  to  go  the 
States. 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes. 

Mr.  Barham.  Now,  you  take  Nevada  for  an  illustration.  IIow 
would  it  be  possible  for  Nevada  to  conserve  the  waters  of  California 
under  an  act  passed  in  Nevada;  and  yet  is  it  not  possible  and  legiti¬ 
mate  for  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  to  do  that  very  thing? 

Mr.  Mead.  I  think  it  is, 

Mr.  Barham.  How  far  would  you  go  toward  an  irrigation  of  arid 
lands,  that  is,  the  conservation  of  the  water,  simply  to  conserve  the 
waters  in  reservoirs? 

Mr.  Mead.  Do  you  mean  by  the  Govennent? 

Mr.  Barham.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  believe  it  is  proper  for  the  Government  to  build  dams 
in  large  rivers  where  the  expense  of  diversion  is  at  present  prohibi¬ 
tive.  I  believe  it  is  proper  for  the  Government  to  build  storage  reser¬ 
voirs  at  the  head  of  streams  to  regulate  the  flood  flow  of  those 
streams. 

Mr.  Barham.  Would  you  go  further  and  carry  the  water  upon  the 
lands  and  distribute  it? 

Mr.  Mead.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Barham.  You  take  it  in  my  State.  I  do  not  ask  this  for  the 
purpose  of  defeating  legislation,  but  for  the  purpose  of  being  able  to 
answer  questions.  You  take  it  in  my  State,  where  the  waters  are  all 
appropriated  over  and  and  over  again,  and  there  is  an  existing  law, 
if  they  are  not,  whereby  they  could  be  appropriated  over  and  over 
again.  You  take  any  scheme  in  California,  and  you  reservoir  a  lot  of 
water.  That  water  of  necessity  would  go  into  the  hands  of  private 
corporations  or  individuals. 

Mr.  Mead.  It  ought  not  to. 

Mr.  Barham.  No,  of  course  not. 

The  Chairman.  It  would  simply  run  down  the  stream  in  its  accus¬ 
tomed  course,  if  it  were  turned  into  the  stream. 

Mr.  Barham.  No,  sir.  Here  are  many  ditches  in  places  which  do 
not  carry  half  the  water  that  they  would  or  could  use  in  the  months 
that  need  irrigation.  These  corporations  or  individuals  can  not  give 
their  customers  half  as  much  water  as  they  want.  Suppose  you  con¬ 
serve  all  the  waters  properly  open  to  conservation.  The  appropria¬ 
tions  in  California  made,  or  to  be  made,  would  take  all  the  waters 
which  it  was  possible  to  catch  in  reservoirs,  and  how  is  it  possible  to 
avoid  the  fact  that  you  are  going  to  enrich  these  corporations  that 
have  the  ditches  there  now? 

Mr.  Mead.  In  the  first  place,  I  do  not  believe  that  the  right  to  water 
should  belong  to  a  company  or  to  a  speculator,  but  these  rights  should 
attach  to  the  lands  which  are  irrigated. 

Mr.  Barham.  But  here  it  is  the  other  way. 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  but  the  question  you  have  to  consider  is  whether 
you  will  have  California  amend  its  laws  or  whether  you  will  have  the 
Government  enact  laws  for  California. 

Mr.  Barham.  Of  course,  we  could  not  ask  California  to  amend  her 
laws.  These  rights  are  all  vested  rights  attached  to  the  lands  that 
have  canals  there. 

Mr.  King.  Does  not  j^our  case  suggest  one  of  the  almost  insuper¬ 
able  objections  to  the  Government  attempting  distribution,  where  not 
only  the  high  water  but  the  low  water  has  been  taken  up? 

Mr.  Barham.  I  want  to  get  at  the  facts,  that  is  all. 


102 


ARID  LAUDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mr.  Mead.  It  seems  to  me  that  if  the  Federal  Government  should 
establish  a  storage  reservoir  in  the  case  you  suggest,  the  first  thing 
would  be  to  determine  the  maximum  approximation  in  high  water,  and 
then  the  Government  could  only  get  anything  above  that  maximum. 
For  instance,  if  in  high  water  they  have  appropriated  there  1,000 
inches,  the  Government  would  have  to  keep  on  carrying  down  to  them 
1,000  inches,  and  it  would  have  to  conserve  water  above  that  1,000 
inches  or  else  its  work  would  benefit  none  but  those  who  were  already 
using  that  amount.  And  above  that  1,000  inches  the  Government 
unquestionably,  as  an  approxiriator,  could  sell  anything  more  than 
that  which  was  available. 

Mr.  Barham.  Thev  could  sell  the  water? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Barham.  How  would  you  distribute  the  water? 

Mr.  Reeder.  Could  you  not  measure  that  water  where  it  goes  out 
of  the  reservoir,  and  is  not  there  a  system  which  permits  that  water 
to  go  out  down  that  stream  5  or  10  miles,  and  the  same  amount  to  be 
taken  out  down  there?  Your  weir  tells  you  what  amount  you  put  in,  and 
then  you  go  down  below  and  take  out  the  same  amount,  less  evapora¬ 
tion.  But  when  you  come  to  a  place  where  you  have  appropriated 
more  water  than  absolutely  exists,  that  could  not  be  done  in  such 
a  £>lace  unless  they  could  get  some  scheme  that  would  solve  this  ques¬ 
tion.  If  you  can  say  to  them,  “If  you  can  arrange  this  so  that  you 
people  can  pay  for  it,  we  will  do  it,  but  if  you  can  not  make  such 
arrangements  we  will  go  to  Nevada  or  somewhere  else  and  do  work 
there.” 

The  Chairman.  It  seems  to  me  those  places  where  they  have  appro¬ 
ximated  the  comxilete  amount  of  water,  where  it  is  done  by  colora¬ 
tions,  as  I  understand  it  is  done  in  California,  it  strikes  me  that  those 
are  good  ^daces  to  let  these  corporations  build  their  own  storage 
reservoirs. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  This  bill  does  not  really  have  any  application  to 
the  interior  valleys  of  California.  It  does  not  apply  there,  but  there 
are  immense  regions  where  it  will  be  the  salvation  of  the  people. 

Mr.  Barham.  Oh,  well,  I  have  projects  in  my  own  State,  plenty  of 
them.  For  instance,  there  is  one  for  running  a  tunnel  through  to 
Willow  Slough,  I  believe. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  That  is  a  place  where  this  bill  would  work  to  a 
charm. 

Mr.  Mead.  It  does  not  make  any  difference  what  bill  you  pass, 
whenever  it  goes  into  oxieration  you  are  going  to  run  into  that  ques¬ 
tion  of  whether  you  are  going  to  recognize  the  right  of  each  State  to 
distribute  water  in  accordance  with  established  laws  and  customs,  or 
whether  the  Government  is  going  to  assume  the  responsibility  on  this 
whole  question,  if  it  does  not  recognize  State  rights. 

Mr.  King.  Pardon  the  interruption,  but  do  you  not  think  that  we 
have  got  to  recognize  State  rights,  and  the  laws  of  the  sovereign 
States,  wherever  we  go  upon  a  stream  where  apxiropriations  have  been 
made;  and  the  onty  places  where  the  Federal  Government  would 
assume  supreme  control  would  be  where  there  are  no  appropriations? 

Mr.  Mead.  I  see  no  objection  to  the  alternative  proposed  a  moment 
ago,  that  this  Government  should  establish  certain  conditions  upon 
which  it  would  appropriate  funds. 

Mr.  King.  I  wish  to  be  perfectly  frank  with  you,  and  I  wish  to  say 
that  I  should  opxiose  any  bill,  I  do  not  care  how  beneficial  to  my  State 
or  an}-  other  State,  which  seeks  to  abrogate  the  rights  of  the  States  to 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


103 


control  their  own  regulations  and  rights  with  relation  to  the  distribu¬ 
tion  of  water. 

Mr.  Newlands.  This  bill  especially  preserves  all  those  rights. 

Mr.  Phillips.  How  far  should  the  National  Government  go  in  the 
conservation  of  water  in  opposition  to  State  laws,  or  where  should 
they  stop? 

Mr.  Mead.  I  see  no  objection  to  the  General  Government  passing 
an  act  to  provide  that  all  the  water  which  is  rendered  available  should 
attach  to  the  land  irrigated ;  that  there  should  be  no  charge  for  the 
distribution  except  a  carrier  charge,  and  the  right  of  appropriating 
those  waters  for  speculative  purposes  should  not  be  recognized ;  and 
I  see  no  reason  why  every  State  should  not  enact  a  law  of  that  kind. 
The  Government  required  the  States  to  provide  certain  guaranties  in 
connection  with  the  Carey  Act.  The  States  had  to  pass  satisfactory 
laws,  laws  that  were  approved  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  before 
they  could  undertake  to  handle  that  donation.  The  situation  you 
[Mr.  Barham]  r.efer  to  in  connection  with  certain  of  the  proposed  res¬ 
ervoirs  in  your  State  is  familiar  to  me.  I  visited  the  stream  you  speak 
of  several  times,  and  there  are  three  or  four  abandoned  ditches,  and 
the  single  ditch  in  operation  was  only  diverting  about  one-quarter  of 
the  water  of  that  stream,  and  the  rest  was  all  going  to  waste,  simply 
because  of  litigation.  Parties  or  corporations  have  been  seeking  to 
establish  control  for  speculative  purposes,  and  they  have  tied  up  the 
use  of  that  stream  almost  entirely  by  litigation.  The  first  step  in  irri¬ 
gation  development  is  to  get  just  and  effective  State  legislation.  But 
the  difficulties  that  the  States  have  had  in  enacting  proper  and  suffi¬ 
cient  State  laws  show  the  impending  difficulties  that  Congress  would 
encounter  if  it  undertook  this  work. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Do  you  not  think  there  is  a  field  in  which  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  could  operate  in  which  it  would  not  interfere  at  all  with  the 
State,  or  the  State  interfere  with  those  operations. 

Mr.  Mead.  Certainly.  I  think  some  works  are  of  such  magnitude 
and  cost  and  their  benefits  extend  over  such  vast  areas  that  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  is  the  onty  agency  now  equipped  to  undertake  them.  All 
storage  works  on  the  heads  of  streams  should  remain  public  works. 
They  should  not  be  private  works  even  if  the  private  parties  were 
willing  to  build  them. 

Mr.  Mondell.  Suppose  that  Congress  should  decide  to  enter  upon 
a  sj’stem  of  construction  of  storage  reservoirs,  and  of  those  only,  and 
should  also  determine  that  it  would  not  enter  upon  a  scheme  unless 
some  way  of  receiving  compensation  for  the  project  in,  say,  ten  years, 
either  by  means  of  the  land  or  of  the  water,  could  be  arranged - 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes? 

Mr.  Mondell  (continuing).  What  plan  would  you  suggest  of  com¬ 
pensation? 

The  Chairman.  Perhaps  Mr.  Mead  has  not  considered  that  question. 

Mr.  Mondell.  I  think  we  want  to  have  the  professor  outline  his 
ideas  of  what  national  legislation  ought  to  be  passed  and  what  the 
General  Government  ought  to  do  in  the  way  of  legislation.  Probably 
the  professor  has  thought  out  something  on  that  line,  and  I  would  be 
glad  to  have  any  suggestions  in  that  direction.  What  would  you  think 
is  the  proper  field  for  the  General  Government  to  work  in — what  it 
ought  to  do? 

Mr.  Mead.  Just  as  a  prelude  to  that  statement  let  me  say,  in  con¬ 
nection  witli  Mr.  Newlands’s  question,  that  I  do  not  believe  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  ought  to  undertake  that  sort  of  work  with  the  idea  of  getting 


104 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


a  direct  compensation  until  it  had  determined  first  whether  it  was 
willing  to  assume  control  of  the  streams  and  regulate  the  head  gates 
of  existing  ditches  and  collect  its  revenues  either  from  the  water  or 
the  land.  If  it  decides  it  does  not  want  to  do  it,  then  it  should  wait 
until  the  State  makes  the  laws  that  would  insure  the  collection  of 
these  rents  and  their  transfer  to  the  Government. 

Mr.  Barham.  We  ought  first  to  find  out  the  facts  in  each  particular 
project  and  then  legislate  for  that  particular  project? 

Mr.  Mead.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Barham.  That  is  my  idea. 

Mr.  Mead.  Now,  I  think  that  the  Government  can  appropriately 
begin  with  the  construction  of  storage  reservoirs,  because  they  are 
needed  on  a  great  many  streams  to  supply  the  deficiencies  of  those 
streams,  and  as  a  means  of  further  extending  the  reclamation  of  the 
cultivated  area  or  the  reclamation  of  public  lands  by  permitting  a 
larger  use  of  the  flood  waters  that  now  run  to  waste  early  in  the  sea¬ 
son.  The  storage  works  on  the  head  waters  of  streams  are  works 
that  in  the  first  place  should  not  be  built  as  private  works  but  as 
public  works,  for  if  they  are  built  as  private  enterprises  the  owner 
of  a  reservoir  has  an  opportunity  in  times  of  necessity  to  levy  almost 
any  exactions  he  chooses  and  which  the  necessities  of  the  farmer 
will  compel  him  to  pay.  Without  the  protection  afforded  by  public 
control  of  streams  the  owner  of  a  private  reservoir  who  must  turn  his 
supply  into  the  stream  will  often  have  difficulty  in  delivering  water 
to  the  people  who  purchase  it,  so  that  with  private  ownership  distri¬ 
bution  must  be  protected  at  public  cost,  otherwise  there  is  the  danger 
that  the  reservoir  owner  would  not  make  anything.  These  works 
ought  to  be  public  works,  and  they  ought  to  be  built  as  an  aid  to  the 
improvement  of  the  country. 

This  is  a  work  that  the  Government  can  appropriately  enter  upon 
at  this  time,  and  if  the  Government  builds  them  simply  as  a  method 
of  utilizing  our  wasted  resources  and  promoting  the  public  welfare  it 
can  appropriately  charge  nothing  for  the  water,  relying  on  getting 
its  compensation  in  other  directions.  That  does  not  interfere  with 
development  b}^  private  enterprise  or  with  the  operation  of  State  laws. 
The  Government  can  say  that  that  water  shall  not  belong  to  any 
speculative  owner,  but  shall  belong  to  the  States,  and  can  provide 
that  the  States  shall  be  required  to  make  laws  for  its  distribution. 
Some  of  the  States  would  not  require  any  additional  legislation,  for 
the}'  already  have  it.  If  the  Government  charges  for  it,  it  must  then 
require  that  the  States  shall  set  in  operation  suitable  machinery  for 
collecting  the  charges  for  the  water  from  those  reservoirs,  or  it  must 
go  on  the  stream  and  collect  them  for  itself.  There  are  only  the  two 
alternatives.  Take  almost  any  instance  I  know  of,  and  unless  you 
have  some  machinery,  some  plan  under  which  public  officials  having 
the  law  at  their  backs  can  raise  or  lower  head  gates,  there  will  never 
be  certainty  or  peace  in  the  distribution  of  water  stored  with  the  pub¬ 
lic  funds.  '  This  feature  must  be  considered  in  any  legislation  that 
provides  for  a  return  of  the  money  expended  on  reservoirs. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Under  this  bill  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  could 
refuse  to  enter  upon  a  project  until  some  method  of  compensation 
was  secured,  or  the  State  itself  made  laws  insuring  collection,  could 
he  not?  He  could  do  that  as  part  of  the  rules  and  regulations? 

Mr.  Mead.  He  could  do  this;  and  could  he  not,  on  the  other  hand, 
if  he  saw  fit,  build  a  reservoir  in  a  State  like  Colorado,  which  has  a 
State  engineer  and  water  commissioners,  and  then  put  his  own  agents 
on  that  stream  and  make  regulations? 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


105 


Mr.  Newlands.  I  should  think  not.  This  law  recognizes  the  laws 
of  the  States  in  regard  to  the  appropriation  and  diversion  of  water,  and 
the  United  States,  in  its  capacity  as  a  water  appropriator,  would  stand 
in  the  same  place  as  any  citizen.  I  should  certainly  expect  the  Gov¬ 
ernment,  however,  before  it  entered  upon  a  project — and  I  think  a 
business  man  like  the  present  Secretary  of  the  Interior  would  certainly 
take  care  of  that — I  should  certainly  expect  that  before  he  entered 
upon  the  project  at  all  he  would  have  some  method  devised,  either 
by  State  laws  or  by  arrangements  with  the  people  who  had  already 
occupied  the  lands,  and  had  ditches  along  the  river,  by  which  he 
would  have  compensation.  That  would  be  simply  a  business  arrange¬ 
ment. 

Mr.  Mead.  Any  legislation  which  stimulates  the  establishment  of 
administrative  laws  by  the  States  is  worth  far  more  than  the  land 
reclaimed  by  any  storage  or  other  work. 

Mr.  Reeder.  We  have  either  to  take  these  appropriations  as  dona¬ 
tions,  or  we  have  to  take  them  with  the  hope  of  returning  them  to 
the  Government.  Now,  I  am  very  much  in  favor  of  the  Government 
simply  building  the  reservoirs,  but  I  do  not  believe  that  we  have  got 
to  the  place  where  Congress  will  do  that.  But  if  Congress  sees  there 
are  certain  funds  that  come  from  those  regions,  and  which  are  avail¬ 
able  for  use  in  the  work  of  irrigation,  I  think  they  will  let  us  use  them, 
with  the  provision  for  a  return,  and  I  prefer  to  do  the  thing  in  that 
way  rather  than  not  to  do  it  at  all. 

Mr.  Newlands.  The  view  of  the  average  business  man  in  the  East 
in  this  matter  is  this:  “You  propose  to  reclaim  75,000,000  acres  of 
land  which  is  worthless  now;  will  it  be  worth  anything  to  you  after 
the  reservoirs  are  built  and  the  rivers  maintained  at  an  average  flow?” 
You  answer,  “Yes.”  “How  much?”  “  From  $1  to  $10  without  the 
irrigating  ditches,  even  in  its  present  desert  state,  with  the  chance 
of  getting  water  out  of  a  river  when  reservoired.”  They  will  say, 
“Well,  if  this  work  raises  the  land  to  that  additional  value,  it  sug¬ 
gests  to  us  that  there  should  be  some  method  by  which  we  will  get  the 
money  back,  and  b}7  which  the  same  money  can  be  used  over  and  over 
again  in  making  water  available  for  the  reclamation  of  other  lands.” 
Now,  the  purpose  of  this  legislation  is  to  make  the  water  available 
for  that  purpose  under  such  rules  as  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may 
provide,  and  I  assume  that  he  will  study  carefully  every  project,  and 
look  particularly  to  the  compensatory  part  of  it,  and  see  to  it  that 
either  the  local  regulations  and  agreements  or  the  existing  laws  of  the 
States  present  a  method  of  securing  compensation. 

Mr.  Barham.  I  would  like  to  ask  one  more  question,  and  that  is,  if 
in  your  opinion  the  Gila  River  is  in  such  a  position  now  that  it  could 
be  taken  charge  of  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  under 
some  such  project  as  has  been  talked  of  here.  Have  you  sufficient  data 
so  that  the  Government  could  go  to  work  on  that  project  and  demon¬ 
strate  to  the  country  what  can  be  done? 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Arizona,  has  a  bill  pending  here  for  that  work. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  have  no  personal  acquaintance  with  the  Gila  River. 
Mr.  Newell  can  answer  that. 

Mr.  Newell.  In  my  opinion  the  matter  is  in  a  condition  which 
should  be  handled  along  the  lines  of  the  Indian  bill,  continuing  the 
detailed  surveys  to  ascertain  all  of  the  facts  with  the  greatest  care  to 
ascertain  the  benefits  to  be  derived  and  the  cost  of  the  work,  and  to 
actually  begin  work  in  the  laying  of  the  foundations  as  soon  as  the 
minor  matter  of  shifting  up  or  down  the  channel  a  few  feet  is 
determined. 


106 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Mi*.  Barham.  Have  you  made  these  surveys  and  examinations  suf¬ 
ficiently,  so  that  you  could  at  once  proceed  with  a  contract  for  putting 
in  a  portion  of  the  foundation,  at  least? 

Mr.  Newell.  In  repty  to  that  I  would  say  that  a  provision  was 
carefully  drawn  and  inserted  in  the  Indian  bill  covering  all  these 
features.  Now,  if  Congress  is  willing,  the  work  can  be  begun  at  once 
and  pushed  through  to  a  successful  completion  as  rapidly  as  the  funds 
are  forthcoming. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Arizona.  Has  the  amount— that  is,  the  cost  of  the 
structure — been  determined? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Arizona.  That  can  be  made  a  complete  work  for 
the  amount  already  figured  out,  as  to  the  cost? 

Mr.  Newell.  Yes,  sir.  The  cost  has  been  estimated  upon  that  by 
two  of  the  best  known  men  in  this  country,  Mr.  J.  B.  Lippincott,  of 
Los  Angeles,  and  Mr.  James  D.  Schuyler,  who  was  engineer  of  the 
Sweetwater  and  the  Hemet  dams,  so  that  there  would  be  no  hesitation 
about  building  these  structures  immediately.  There  are  minor  details 
which  should  be  carefully  considered  after  knowing  the  foundations. 

Mr.  Barham.  Do  you  know  of  any  reason  why  we  should  not  pass 
the  bill  of  Mr.  Wilson? 

Mr.  Newell.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  King.  I  would  like  to  ask  some  questions  of  Mr.  Newlands.  I 
wish  to  preface  the  questions  I  ask  Mr.  Newlands  by  saying  that  it 
seems  to  me,  in  order  to  stand  any  show  of  getting  legislation  on  the 
lines  proposed  in  this  bill,  we  have  got  to  provide  for  compensation ; 
and  I  do  not  see  any  reason  why  men  who  can  go  on  the  public  domain 
and  take  up  the  land  after  the  Government  has  gone  to  a  big  expense 
and  brought  the  water  right  to  their  doors,  ought  not  to  be  willing  to 
pay  for  it.  Homesteaders  now  have  to  pay  $45  and  $50  an  acre  for 
every  acre  of  water  they  get.  Now,  if  the  Government  pays  a  large 
proportion  of  this — of  course  it  will  not  pay  for  all  of  it;  private  canals 
and  lateral  ditches  will  be  dug  by  private  enterprise — but  if  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  pays  a  large  proportion  of  the  cost  incident  to  the  matter,  I 
see  no  reason  why  they  should  not  pay  the  Government  for  the  value 
of  the  water  obtained,  and  thereby  increase  this  fund,  which  is  con¬ 
stantly  being  diminished  now,  for  the  prosecution  of  further  schemes. 

I  want  to  ask  Mr.  Newlands  when,  in  his  opinion,  assuming  that  the 
Government  enters  upon  this  scheme  of  reclamation,  can  the  Govern¬ 
ment  safely  withdraw  from  the  State  and  leave  to  the  State  the  oper¬ 
ation  of  a  reservoir  constructed  by  the  Government? 

Mr.  Newlands.  As  soon  as  it  receives  compensation. 

Mr.  King.  Suppose  a  reservoir  is  constructed  capable  of  irrigating 
100,000  acres  of  land,  and  50,000  acres  of  that  water  are  sold,  leaving 
50,000  acres  unsold.  How  would  you  unite  the  conflicting  interests 
there  for  the  purpose  of  governing  and  controlling  the  water,  and  how 
would  you  control  the  water?  Would  you  have  some  representative  of 
the  Government  there  in  the  State  taking  charge  of  this  reservoir,  and 
trying  to  cooperate,  as  by  a  sort  of  an  involuntary  partnership,  with 
the  other  persons  to  whom  you  had  alienated  it? 

Mr.  Newlands.  I  should  think  that  so  far  as  existing  occupants 
are  concerned,  having  existing  ditches  and  partial  reclamation,  but 
without  a  sufficiency  of  water,  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  could 
make  arrangements  with  that  acreage  to  supply  them  with  so  much 
water,  and  fix  it  in  the  shape  of  water-rights  appurtenant  to  the  land 
irrigated.  Now,  we  will  assume  that  a  man  owning  80  acres  of  land 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


107 


lias  sufficient  flood  waters  to  furnish  him  with  a  foot  of  water  all  over 
his  land,  and  he  needs  6  inches  more  during  the  period  of  drought. 
Rules  and  regulations  should  be  provided  for  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  so  as  to  fix  the  price  of  that  6  inches,  and  he  should  make  it 
payable  in  annual  installments,  ten  annual  installments,  say,  and  he 
would  very  likely  even  go  further  and  make  it  a  lien  upon  the  land. 
But  I  think  all  that  would  be  a  matter  of  rule  and  regulations.  Now, 
suppose  besides  these  settlements  there  are  existing  public  lands  that 
are  incapable  of  reclamation  under  existing  conditions.  Their  value 
would  be  very  much  greater  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  the  flow  of 
the  stream  would  be  much  greater  and  would  be  properly  regulated. 
Now,  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  could  make  a  regulation  that  from 
$1  to  $5  an  acre  should  be  paid  in  ten  annual  installments,  say  for 
the  land  itself,  leaving  it  to  a  man  to  arrange  for  the  carriage  of  it 
through  existing  ditches. 

Mr.  King.  Does  it  not  look  to  you  like  there  would  be  an  enforced 
partnership  between  the  State  and  individuals  and  the  Government 
which  would  establish  more  or  less  a  system  of  paternalistic  land¬ 
lordism? 

Mr.  Newlands.  No,  sir.  I  think  the  title  to  both  land  and  water 
would  gradually  drift  out  of  the  Government,  and  I  think  instead  of 
perpetuating  the  ownership  of  land  it  would  have  a  tendency  in  exactly 
the  opposite  direction,  for  the  Government  will  be  constantly  parting 
with  its  rights,  both  in  land  and  water,  and  in  the  end  the  control  of 
the  reservoirs  and  irrigation  works  can  be  finally  turned  over  to  the 
homesteaders.  I  have  not  provided  for  such  turning  over  in  this  bill. 
Mr.  Mead  suggested  that  it  would  be  be:st  to  turn  over  the  reservoirs 
to  the  States.  That  is  all  very  well  if  the  reservoir  is  in  the  same 
State  as  the  land  to  be  irrigated  and  reclaimed.  But  suppose  such  a 
case  as  that  in  Nevada,  where  these  three  rivers,  whose  reservoirs  will 
be  in  California,  irrigate  lands  in  Nevada.  Nevada  could  not  admin¬ 
ister  a  reservoir  in  California.  So  I  left  that  out  completely,  believ¬ 
ing  that  the  experience  of  operation  under  this  act  would  make 
apparent  some  method  by  which  that  question  could  be  property 
handled, 

Mr.  Reeder.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  homesteader  and  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  have  already  gone  into  a  partnership,  and  that  until  the 
homesteader  perfects  his  title  that  partnership  does  not  cease  to  exist 
until  the  final  papers  are  made  out? 

Mr.  King.  There  is  no  partnership.  The  Government  does  not 
control  his  crops  or  his  conduct.  He  is  not  renting  anything.  They 
are  in  the  relation  of  vendor  and  vendee. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Yes,  and  that  would  be  the  relation  here. 

Mr.  Mead.  I  would  like  to  add  one  more  word.  The  discussion  of 
Mr.  King  and  Mr.  Newlands  has  suggested  to  me  a  little  further  elab¬ 
oration  of  my  answer  to  this  committee  a  moment  ago  about  legislation. 
I  believe  that  States  which  have  good  laws  and  proper  institutions,  if 
they  had  the  lands  they  could  handle  this  matter  better  than  Congress 
can,  looking  simpty  at  their  internal  interests  and  ignoring  this  ques¬ 
tion  of  interstate  waters.  I  believe  there  are  States  where  they  are 
not  equipped  to  do  anything  with  this  question,  with  either  the  land 
or  water,  under  present  laws,  and  there  must  be,  inevitably,  better 
State  water  laws  in  the  future,  or  the  interests  of  irrigation  will  be 
seriously  jeopardized;  and  I  believe  that  in  those  States  one  of  two 
alternatives  must  be  accepted — either  Congress  must  insist  on  ade¬ 
quate  legislation  previous  to  appropriating  money  to  help  them,  or 


108 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


it  must  enact  laws  of  its  own  and  take  control  there,  because  there 
is  absolutely  no  provision  whatever  in  many  of  these  Western  States 
by  which  there  could  be  any  effective  distribution  of  stored  water. 
There  is  now  no  orderly  or  systematic  distribution  of  the  water  of  the 
streams,  and  one  of  two  policies  should  be  adopted  by  the  Government 
in  this  matter — either  to  put  pressure  on  the  States  to  enact  wise  laws, 
and  then  distribute  the  water  under  those  laws,  or  else  Congress  to 
take  control  itself. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Would  you  suggest  that  a  provision  be  put  in 
this  bill  similar  to  the  provision  in  the  Carey  Act,  compelling  the 
States  to  pass  legislation  upon  this  subject  that  will  be  satisfactory 
to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior? 

Mr.  Mead.  I  believe  that  would  be  a  wise  provision,  and  a  helpful 
provision  to  the  whole  Western  country.  It  would  stimulate  interest 
and  action  in  this  matter.  There  are  a  number  of  provisions  in  Mr. 
Newland’s  bill  that  ought  to  be  incorporated  in  State  laws.  They  are 
entirely  right.  The  provision  for  small  acreage  and  the  provision  for 
prevention  of  speculative  ownership  of  water  are  wise  and  proper, 
and  I  see  no  reason  why  there  should  not  be  properly  inserted  in  this 
legislation  that  the  States  should  enact  provisions  for  the  orderly 
distribution  of  the  waters  of  the  streams  and  for  the  collection  of  the 
money  under  State  laws,  and  guaranteeing  its  payment  to  the  Secre¬ 
tary  of  the  Interior  as  a  condition  precedent  to  receiving  aid.  That 
has  been  done  in  legislation  making  donations  to  States  before. 

Thereupon,  at  5  o’clock  p.  m.,  the  committee  adjourned  until  Satur¬ 
day,  February  9,  1901,  at  11  o’clock  a.  m. 


Washington,  D.  C.,  February  9,  1901. 

The  committee  met,  Hon.  Thomas  H.  Tongue  in  the  chair. 

The  Chairman.  We  would  like  to  hear  from  Mr.  Maxwell  in  con¬ 
tinuation  of  the  discussion  of  the  practicability  of  the  Government 
constructing  works  for  the  reclamation  of  the  arid  lands. 

STATEMENT  OF  GEORGE  H.  MAXWELL,  CHAIRMAN  OF  EXECUTIVE 
COMMITTEE  OF  NATIONAL  IRRIGATION  ASSOCIATION. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  At  the  last  meeting  of  this  committee  particular 
attention  was  given  to  the  fact  that  there  are  many  jfiaces  where  the 
reclamation  of  arid  land  will  be  involved  more  or  less  with  the  control 
of  water  now  used  in  part  for  irrigation.  Undue  emphasis  was,  in 
my  opinion,  placed  upon  this  matter,  as  it  is  not  an  insuperable  objec¬ 
tion,  nor  one  which  can  not  be  removed  by  the  application  of  a  few 
broad  principles.  This  may  well  be  laid  aside  in  favor  of  simpler 
and  commoner  cases,  where  the  Government,  as  the  owner  of  the  arid 
lands,  can  reclaim  vast  areas  without  complicacy  with  established 
rights.  It  is  better  to  take  up  these  simpler  cases  first  and  to  leave 
the  doubtful  matters  for  solution.  In  other  words  the  bill  under  dis¬ 
cussion  does  not  purport  to  deal  with  the  intricacies  brought  up,  but 
rather  to  apply  to  the  great  need  of  the  general  reclamation  of  the 
West.  If  we  diverge  from  this  central  idea  to  discuss  special  cases 
we  shall  soon  become  involved  in  endless  side  issues. 

There  are  locations  where  the  Government  can  build  these  irrigation 
works,  and  where  they  will  be  remunerative  and  profitable  as  a  busi¬ 
ness  proposition  to  the  Government,  although,  of  course,  there  are 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


109 


other  reasons  why  the  Government  would  he  benefited,  even  though 
it  made  no  direct  profit. 

Referring,  for  example,  to  the  item  in  the  Indian  appropriation  bill 
for  the  San  Carlos  dam  in  Arizona,  the  area  of  public  lands  reclaim- 
able  is  100,000  acres,  the  exact  capacity  of  the  reservoir  being  241,000 
acre-feet,  and  the  public  land  irrigable  therefrom  would  have  a  value 
of  $5,034,900.  Thus,  if  the  Government  went  into  this  for  a  profit, 
it  would  produce  a  value  of  more  than  twice  the  amount  of  the 
investment. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Does  the  estimate  cover  the  cost  of  all  the  divert¬ 
ing  ditches  that  are  necessary  to  reclaim  the  land  or  simply  a 
reservoir? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  It  covers  the  main  canal  also.  The  entire  cost  of 
the  project,  as  I  recall  it,  is  something  inside  of  $2,000,000.  The  cost 
of  the  reservoir,  I  think,  is  estimated  at  $1,030,000,  but  I  have  made 
a  liberal  estimate.  The  point  is  that  if  the  Government  wanted  to  go 
into  it  as  a  profitable  enterprise  it  could  make  a  profit;  but,  in  my 
judgment,  the  Government  does  not  want  to  do  that.  What  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  wants  to  do  is  to  create  homes  on  the  public  domain,  and  if 
it  gets  this  money  back,  that  is  all  it  needs.  The  remarkable  results 
that  would  be  recorded  in  the  West  can  be  illustrated  bv  additional 
facts  with  reference  to  the  reasons  which  are  applicable  to  all  the 
other  arid  States  and  Territories. 

In  my  discussion  I  have  followed  an  entirely  different  line  from  that 
suggested  by  Mr.  Mead.  The  difficulties  with  Mr.  Mead’s  conception 
of  the  subject,  in  my  judgment,  are  that  he  illustrates  his  remarks  by 
conditions  where  complications  exist  which  would  prevent  the  satis- 
factoiy  operation  of  this  bill;  but  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  there 
are  estimated  to  be  in  the  neighborhood  of  100,000,000  acres  of  lands 
in  the  West  which  are  capable  of  reclamation — Government  lands; 
that  those  lands  are  scattered  throughout  a  multitude  of  localities, 
each  localit}^  having  certain  specific  local  conditions,  and  you  can  find 
locality  after  locality,  you  can  find  land  enough  in  the  West  which 
the  Government  could  reclaim  under  the  Newlands  bill  to  keep  the 
Government  at  work  ten  years  with  all  the  money  that  would  come  in 
under  that  bill  without  running  counter  to  one  single  objection  Mr. 
Mead  has  raised.  Take  the  results  of  this  policy.  There  are,  I  appre¬ 
hend,  in  Arizona  at  least,  5,000,000  acres  of  land  which  could  be 
reclaimed.  I  take  that  as  a  round  sum  for  illustration.  I  have  heard 
it  estimated  as  high  as  12,000,000  acres.  I  have  heard  Hon.  Binger 
Hermann,  in  an  address  at  a  banquet  at  Phoenix,  Ariz.,  five  years  ago, 

1  think,  estimate  the  number  of  acres  as  12,000,000.  But  take 
5,000,000  acres,  reclaiming  it  on  the  average  cost  per  acre  given,  and 
dispose  of  it  at  $20  an  acre,  and  what  have  you  done?  You  have  cre¬ 
ated  out  of  an  absolute  desert,  which  is  worthless  to-day,  either  to  the 
State  or  the  National  Government,  property  worth  $100,000,000.  Just 
think  of  it!  That  can  be  done  in  Arizona,  a  Territory  where  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  owns  the  land  and  water  and  where  there  are  no  complica¬ 
tions. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  And  the  Government  also  has  entire  con¬ 
trol  of  legislation? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Yes.  What  does  that  mean  to  the  Territory?  At 

2  per  cent  on  the  hundred  that  would  give  Arizona  an  annual  income 
which  would  support  the  Territory.  The  increase  which  will  pile  up 
when  you  begin  to  take  into  consideration  the  values  created  by  the 
building  of  irrigation  works  in  the  West  dazzles  imagination. 


110 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


The  Chairman.  Let  me  ask  you  one  question  right  there,  if  you 
please.  In  estimating  the  amount  of  acres  in  Arizona  at  5,000,000,  do 
you  mean  that  to  embrace  the  total  arid-land  area  or  the  land  that 
could  be  fairly  reclaimed? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  The  irrigable  land  only,  the  land  that  is  reclaim- 
able.  From  the  standpoint  of  the  Territory  of  Arizona  you  have 
practically  created  a  commonwealth.  You  have  created  a  property 
there  that  will  be  a  basis  for  State  taxation,  and  so  on  for  all  time. 
You  have  created  it  out  of  nothing.  The  Government  has  got  its 
money  back.  What  else  has  the  Government  got? 

At  the  last  session  of  Congress  this  Government  appropriated,  I 
think,  $710,000,000,  or  something  over  that.  Our  population  is  some¬ 
thing  like  76,000,000.  In  other  words,  to  make  the  illustration,  if  we 
do  appropriate  $760,000,000,  we  would  have  appropriated  and  expended 
$10,000,000  for  every  1,000,000  of  population.  And  3Tet  no  man  has 
felt  the  burden.  Now,  what  does  that  mean?  If  it  has  put  5,000,000 
acres  of  this  land  under  cultivation  in  Arizona,  it  means  a  population 
at  the  very  least  of  1,000,000 ;  but  that  is  low,  because  there  are  sections 
in  existence  in  LT tah  and  California  to-day  where  the  average  population 
on  irrigated  land  is  as  man}7  as  1  per  acre.  There  is  a  saving  to  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  of  $10,000,000  per  year  on  the  same  basis  of  jDop illation.  If  the 
population  in  this  case  was  simply  doubled  you  could  collect  twice  as 
much  revenue,  or  you  could  collect  half  as  much  from  each  and  have 
the  same  as  now. 

Mr.  Ray.  How  do  you  figure  out  so  much  profit  to  the  Government? 
A  day  or  two  ago  I  attended  a  meeting  here,  and  one  of  the  speakers 
adverted  to  the  fact  that  corporations,  at  the  most  desirable  points 
and  where  most  feasible,  had  engaged  in  this  work  of  buiding  reser¬ 
voirs  and  supplying  water  for  irrigation,  and  had  abandoned  it.  He 
stated  that  such  reclamation  work  could  not  be  carried  on  because  it  had 
proved  so  costly  and  unremunerative.  Now,  if  the  corporations  can 
not  do  it,  how  can  the  Federal  Government  take  the  same  land  and 
carr}7  on  this  work  and  be  expected  to  get  great  returns  from  it? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  would  like  to  say,  Mr.  Ray,  that  in  my  discussion 
here  I  had  not  intended  to  convey  the  idea  that  the  Government  can 
carry  out  this  general  plan  and  make  a  profit  on  each  and  every  proj¬ 
ect.  The  plan  I  have  been  discussing  is  based  on  the  idea  that  the 
Government  shall  get  its  m one}'  back  from  each  project,  with  the 
benefit  to  go  to  the  public  from  the  perpetual  basis  of  taxation 
created.  That  is  the  benefit  to  the  State,  the  creating  of  a  popula¬ 
tion  from  which  the  Government  can  perpetually  draw  revenue. 
That  is  sufficient  to  warrant  the  Government  in  reclaiming  this  prop¬ 
erty  and  adding  it  to  our  domain.  That  the  Federal  Government  can 
do  that  when  corporations,  or  even  the  States,  can  not  do  it  grows  out 
of  several  reasons.  The  advocates  of  the  theory  of  State  cession  were 
insistent  in  Congress  for  many  years  before  the  Carey  Act.  Finally 
the  Carey  Act  was  passed  as  a  basis  of  compromise.  The  Carey  Act 
permits  each  State  to  take  1,000,000  acres  and  reclaim  it  without  cost, 
provided  they  subdivided  it  among  homesteaders.  Now,  if  the  State 
had  the  money  in  the  Treasury  to  reclaim  that  land  under  the  Carey 
Act  for  the  very  lowest  price  which  it  could  be  done,  if  they  could  let 
a  contract  for  spot  cash  payable  whenever  the  work  was  done,  I  think 
that,  provided  the  administration  was  wise  and  honest,  the  State 
could  do  it;  but  in  the  first  place,  the  difficulty  is  that  the  adminis¬ 
tration  of  these  matters  in  the  States  has  not  been  satisfactory;  it  has 
fallen  into  the  hands  of  incompetent  men,  to  say  the  least;  and  more 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Ill 


than  that,  the  States  have  not  the  money  and  can  not  raise  it.  Take 
the  Territory  of  Arizona.  It  has  no  funds;  it  can  not  bond  the  Ter¬ 
ritory  for  this  great  work.  If  it  could  borrow  the  money  it  could  not 
pay  the  interest,  because  the  proceeds  from  the  disposition  of  the 
land  could  not  come  in  until  the  settler  had  gone  on  the  land  and 
produced  a  crop,  and  lived  there  a  number  of  years.  Yes,  not  only 
that;  even  in  the  States  where  they  have  the  resources  which  would 
enable  them  to  raise  the  money  by  direct  taxation  or  by  issuing  State 
bonds  and  entering  upon  this  work,  they  have  refused  to  do  it.  In 
California  the  people  have  taken  the  ground  that  the  Government 
should  reclaim  these  lands,  and  they  have  declined  to  enter  upon  the 
project.  In  Wyoming  and  Montana,  where  they  have  attempted  to 
reclaim  lands  under  the  Carey  Act,  they  have  not  assumed  the  obliga¬ 
tion  of  seeing  it  done  successfully.  They  have  turned  it  over  to  land 
speculators  and  allowed  them  to  take  the  contract  and  take  bonds  for 
their  pay  secured  on  the  lands.  They  can  not  sell  those  bonds  for 
cash.  The  law  theoretically  contemplates  that  they  shall  sell  the 
bonds  and  put  the  money  into  the  State  treasury  and  then  let  the  con¬ 
tract;  but  they  do  not  do  it.  I  investigated  this  last  summer  and  I 
found  the  law  permitted  a  bonded  debt  of  $12  an  acre  upon  that  land. 
The}^  were  not  able  to  sell  the  bonds.  They  contracted  with  men  who 
undertook  to  dig  the  ditches  at  the  highest  price  they  could  give  them, 
which  was  $12  an  acre.  The  result  is  going  to  be  in  every  such  case, 
if  they  do  reclaim  the  land  the  men  who  hold  the  bonds  will  foreclose 
and  get  the  land.  Governor  J.  K.  Toole,  of  Montana,  last  month  said 
that  under  the  Carey  Act  there  had  been  quite  a  number  of  enter¬ 
prises  started  in  Montana,  but  not  one  acre  of  land  has  ever  been 
reclaimed. 

In  the  last  report  of  the  Montana  State  commission  having  the  mat¬ 
ter  in  charge  it  is  stated  that  if  the  bonds  could  be  sold  and  cash 
obtained  the  lands  could  be  reclaimed ;  but  this  could  not  be  done, 
and,  as  a  consequence,  the  whole  matter  has  been  declared  a  failure. 

The  so-called  Carey  Act  is  to  be  found  in  section  4  of  the  act  of  August 
18,  1894,  entitled  “An  act  making  appropriations  for  sundry  civil 
expenses  of  the  Government  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1895, 
and  for  other  purposes”  (28  Stat.,  372-422),  authorizing  the  Secretary 
of  the  Interior,  with  the  approval  of  the  President,  to  contract  and 
agree  to  patent  to  the  States  of  Washington,  Oregon,  California, 
Nevada,  Idaho,  Montana,  Wyoming,  Colorado,  North  Dakota,  South 
Dakota,  and  Utah,  or  any  other  States,  as  provided  in  the  act,  in 
which  may  be  found  desert  lands,  not  to  exceed  1,000,000  acres  of 
such  lands  to  each  State,  under  certain  conditions. 

The  text  of  the  act  is  as  follows: 

Sec.  4.  That  to  aid  the  public-land  States  in  the  reclamation  of  the  desert  lands 
therein,  and  the  settlement,  cultivation,  and  sale  thereof  in  small  tracts  to  actual 
settlers,  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  with  the  approval  of  the  President,  be,  and 
hereby  is,  authorized  and  empowered,  upon  proper  application  of  the  State,  to 
contract  and  agree  from  time  to  time  with  each  of  the  States  in  which  there  may 
be  situated  desert  lands  as  defined  by  the  act  entitled  “An  act  to  provide  for  the 
sale  of  desert  land  in  certain  States  and  Territories, ’’approved  March  third,  eighteen 
hundred  and  seventy-seven,  and  the  act  amendatory  thereof,  approved  March 
third,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-one,  binding  the  United  States  to  donate, 
grant,  and  patent  to  the  State  free  of  cost  for  survey  or  price  such  desert  lands, 
not  exceeding  one  million  acres  in  each  State,  as  the  State  may  cause  to  be  irri¬ 
gated,  reclaimed,  occupied,  and  not  less  than  twenty  acres  of  each  one-hundred- 
and-sixty-acre  tract  cultivated  by  actual  settlers,  within  ten  years  next  after  the 
passage  of  this  act,  as  thoroughly  as  is  required  of  citizens  who  may  enter  under 
che  said  desertdand  law. 


112 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Before  the  application  of  any  State  is  allowed  or  any  contract  or  agreement  is 
executed  or  any  segregation  of  any  of  the  land  from  the  public  domain  is  ordered 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  the  State  shall  file  a  map  of  the  said  land  proposed 
to  be  irrigated  which  shall  exhibit  a  plan  showing  the  mode  of  the  contemplated 
irrigation  and  which  plan  shall  be  sufficient  to  thoroughly  irrigate  and  reclaim 
said  land  and  prepare  it  to  raise  ordinary  agricultural  crops  and  shall  also  show 
the  source  of  the  water  to  be  used  for  irrigation  and  reclamation,  and  the  Secre¬ 
tary  of  the  Interior  may  make  necessary  regulations  for  the  reservation  of  the 
lands  applied  for  by  the  States  to  date  from  the  date  of  the  filing  of  the  map  and 
plan  of  irrigation,  but  such  reservation  shall  be  of  no  force  whatever  if  such  map 
and  plan  of  irrigation  shall  not  be  approved.  That  any  State  contracting  under 
this  section  is  hereby  authorized  to  make  all  necessary  contracts  to  cause  the  said 
lands  to  be  reclaimed  and  to  induce  their  settlement  and  cultivation  in  accordance 
with  and  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  section;  but  the  State  shall  not  be 
authorized  to  lease  any  of  said  lands  or  to  use  or  dispose  of  the  same  in  any  way 
whatever,  except  to  secure  their  reclamation,  cultivation,  and  settlement. 

As  fast  as  any  State  may  furnish  satisfactory  proof,  according  to  such  rules  and 
regulations  as  may  be  prescribed  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  that  any  of  said 
lands  are  irrigated,  reclaimed,  and  occupied  by  actual  settlers,  patents  shall  be 
issued  to  the  State  or  its  assigns  for  said  lands  so  reclaimed  and  settled:  Provided , 
That  said  States  shall  not  sell  or  dispose  of  more  than  one  hundred  and  sixty  acres 
of  said  lands  to  any  one  person,  and  any  surplus  of  money  derived  by  any  State  from 
the  sale  of  said  lands  in  excess  of  the  cost  of  their  reclamation  shall  be  held  as  a 
trust  fund  for  and  be  applied  to  the  reclamation  of  other  desert  lands  in  such  State; 
that  to  enable  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  examine  any  of  the  lands  that  may  be 
selected  under  the  provisions  of  this  section  there  is  hereby  appropriated,  out  of 
any  moneys  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  one  thousand  dollars. 

In  the  act  making  appropriations  for  sundry  civil  expenses  of  the 
Government  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1897,  and  for  other 
purposes,  approved  June  11,  1896,  there  is,  under  the  head  of  appro¬ 
priation  for  “  surveying  public  lands,”  the  following  provision: 

That  under  any  law  heretofore  or  hereafter  enacted  by  any  State,  providing  for 
the  reclamation  of  arid  lands,  in  pursuance  and  acceptance  of  the  terms  of  the 
grant  made  in  section  four  of  an  act  entitled  “An  act  making  appropriations  for 
the  sundry  civil  expenses  of  the  Government  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
thirtieth,  eighteen  hundredand  ninety- five,”  approved  August  eighteenth,  eighteen 
hundred  and  ninety-four,  a  lien  or  liens  is  hereby  authorized  to  be  created  by  the 
State  to  which  such  lands  are  granted  and  by  no  other  authority  whatever,  and 
when  created  shall  be  valid  on  and  against  the  separate  legal  subdivisions  of  land 
reclaimed,  for  the  actual  cost  and  necessary  expenses  of  reclamation  and  reason¬ 
able  interest  thereon  from  the  date  of  reclamation  until  disposed  of  to  actual  set¬ 
tlers;  and  when  an  ample  supply  of  water  is  actually  furnished  in  a  substantial 
ditch  or  canal,  or  by  artesian  wells  or  reservoirs,  to  reclaim  a  particular  tract  or 
tracts  of  such  lands,  then  patents  shall  issue  for  the  same  to  such  State  without 
regard  to  settlement  or  cultivation:  Provided ,  That  in  no  event,  in  no  contingency, 
and  under  no  circumstances  shall  the  United  States  be  in  any  manner  directly  or 
indirectly  liable  for  any  amount  of  any  such  lien  or  liability,  in  whole  or  in  part. 

A  further  modification  has  been  made  by  an  act  making  appropria¬ 
tions  for  sundry  civil  expenses  of  the  Government  for  the  fiscal  year 
ending  June  30,  1902,  and  for  other  purposes  (approved  March  3, 
1901),  as  follows: 

Sec.  3.  That  section  four  of  the  act  of  August  eighteenth,  eighteen  hundred  and 
ninety-four,  entitled  “An  act  making  appropriations  for  sundry  civil  expenses  of 
the  Government  for  the  fiscal  3Tear  ending  June  thirtieth,  eighteen  hundred  and 
ninety- five,  and  for  other  purposes,”  is  hereby  amended  so  that  the  ten  years’ 
period  within  which  any  State  shall  cause  the  lands  applied  for  under  said  act  to 
be  irrigated  and  reclaimed,  as  provided  in  said  section  as  amended  by  the  act  of 
June  eleventh,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-six,  shall  begin  to  run  from  the  date 
of  approval  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  of  the  State's  application  for  the  seg¬ 
regation  of  such  lands;  and  if  the  State  fails  within  said  ten  years  to  cause  the 
whole  or  any  part  of  the  lands  so  segregated  to  be  so  irrigated  and  reclaimed,  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  may,  in  his  discretion,  continue  said  segregation  for  a 
period  of  not  exceeding  five  years,  or  may,  in  his  discretion,  restore  such  lands  to 
the  public  domain. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


113 


The  laws  of  Wyoming*,  Idaho,  and  Utah  are  somewhat  similar,  and 
provide  that  the  State  land  hoards  are  authorized  to  make  contracts 
with  private  individuals  or  corporations  for  the  main  canals  or  other 
irrigation  works,  and  also  to  fix  the  charge  for  perpetual  water  rights. 
This  right  goes  with  the  land  and  can  not  he  sold  separately. 

In  Idaho  and  Wyoming  the  fixed  rate  for  the  purchase  of  the  land  from 
the  State  is  50  cents  per  acre.  In  Utah  it  is  not  to  exceed  $1  per  acre. 

Under  the  Washington  law  a  single  commissioner  is  authorized,  who 
shall  have  power  to  make  contracts  for  canals,  ditches,  or  other  irri¬ 
gation  works,  reclamation,  settlement,  and  sale  of  lands.  Contracts 
are  to  be  approved  by  the  governor  and  attorney-general  of  the  State. 
Lands  shall  be  sold  with  a  perpetual  water  right  at  not  less  than  $5 
nor  more  than  150  per  acre  and  a  maintenance  fee  of  not  more  than 
$1.50  per  acre  annually.  The  person  or  persons  or  corporation  whose 
bid  shall  be  accepted  shall  own  and  must  maintain  all  canals  for  a 
period  of  at  least  fifteen  years  from  date  of  acceptance  of  completed 
works,  and  thereafter  the  same  shall  revert  to  the  landowners.  The 
successful  bidder  shall  pay  to  the  State  for  the  privilege  enjoyed  in 
reclaiming  the  lands  75  cents  per  acre  to  defray  expenses  and  reim¬ 
burse  the  State  for  outlay. 

In  Montana  the  State,  as  before  stated,  has  been  unable  to  accom¬ 
plish  anything  of  note  under  the  Carey  Act,  for  the  reason  that  the 
State  has  refused  to  make  itself  responsible  in  any  way.  The  matter 
has  been  intrusted  to  the  arid-land-grant  commission,  which  has  been 
vainly  endeavoring  to  dispose  of  the  bonds.  The  principal  facts  con¬ 
cerning  this  commission  are  as  follows : 

(1)  The  State  arid-land  grant  commission  is  composed  of  five  members. 

(2)  It  is  empowered  to  select  lands  and  to  make  surveys  of  necessary  water  sys¬ 
tems  for  their  reclamation. 

(3)  To  enter  into  contracts  for  the  construction  of  water  systems  and  to  cause 
the  lands  to  be  settled. 

(4)  To  issue  thirty-year  6  per  cent  bonds  to  meet  the  cost  of  reclamation  and 
settlement  of  lands,  which  bonds  constitute  a  lien  upon  the  land,  water  rights, 
water  system,  and  appurtenances  to  a  district  belonging. 

(5)  To  issue  thirty-year  6  per  cent  bonds  to  develop  water-power  plants  and 
water  supply  for  domestic  use,  for  the  redemption  of  which  bonds  a  sinking  fund 
is  provided.  These  bonds  constitute  a  lien  upon  the  water  system  and  appurte¬ 
nances.  All  bonds  can  be  foreclosed,  as  in  the  case  of  mortgages,  for  nonpayment 
of  principal  or  interest. 

(6)  To  sell  such  bonds  at  par  for  cash  and  pay  cash  for  construction,  or  to  pay 
bonds  in  lieu  of  cash. 

(7)  The  commission  exercises  full  and  immediate  control  over  all  construction 
and  requires  suitable  indemnity  from  the  contractor  in  the  form  of  a  bond  from 
some  responsible  surety  company. 

(8)  The  commission  retains  15  per  cent  of  the  entire  cost  of  construction  of 
water  systems  and  settlement  of  lands  until  both  are  fully  accomplished. 

(9)  The  commission  operates  and  maintains  perpetually  the  water  system, 
charging  the  entire  cost  of  such  maintenance  and  operation  equally  against  all 
acreage  in  the  district. 

(10)  The  commission  sells  all  land  and  water  rights,  collects  all  moneys  and 
places  them  in  the  treasury  of  the  State. 

(11)  In  the  event  interest  is  not  paid  when  due,  for  want  of  funds,  interest 
coupons  may  be  registered  in  the  office  of  the  State  treasurer,  which  registered 
coupons  will  draw  interest  at  6  per  cent  per  annum. 

(12)  In  the  event  there  is  a  surplus  in  the  State  treasury  after  providing  for  the 
redemption  of  coupons  next  due,  the  commission  may  require  the  State  treasurer 
to  invest  such  moneys  in  State,  county,  or  school-district  bonds,  or  it  may  cause 
such  moneys  to  be  placed  in  trust  for  the  benefit  of  the  bondholders. 

(13)  The  commission  will  provide  for  the  payment  of  interest  and  principal  in 
the  manner  as  shown  herewith  in  certificate  of  selection,  terms  of  sale,  and 
regulations. 


11196—01 - 8 


114 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


Summing  up  the  situation,  the  results  are  best  shown  in  the  accom¬ 
panying  table,  which  brings  out  plainly  the  fact  that  after  six  or  seven 
years  of  effort  less  than  1,000,000  acres  have  been  applied  for  by  5  out 
of  the  11  States  named  in  the  act,  and  about  one-fourth  of  the  acreage 
contained  in  this  list  has  been  approved.  Less  than  8,000  acres  have 
actually  been  patented  or  disposed  of  by  the  Government  out  of  the 
possible  total.  In  other  words,  an  enormously  expensive  machinery 
has  been  created  by  law  to  dispose  of  these  lands,  and  after  years  of 
effort  and  large  expenditures  incurred  by  the  various  States  in  legis¬ 
lation  and  in  the  maintenance  of  boards  and  surveys,  less  than  8,000 
acres  have  actually  been  disposed  of. 

Status  of  selections  under  act  of  August  IS,  1894. 


Acreage  applied  for  by  each  of  the  States:  Acres. 

Idaho,  6  lists  . . . . . . . . . . . .  323, 308. 80 

Montana,  5  lists  . . . . . . . . .  91,015.00 

Utah,  3  lists . . . . . . .  . . .  236,467.50 

W ashington,  4  lists . . . . .  85, 456. 26 

Wyoming,  17  lists . . . . . . . . . 212,210.34 


Total-. . . . . . .  948,457.90 


Acreage  of  lists  approved  (not  patented): 

Idaho,  3  lists . . . .  - . . . .  57, 706.  51 

Montana,  5  lists . . . . .  91 ,  015. 00 

Wyoming,  11  lists . . . ..  99,057.58 


Total-- . . . . . . . .  247,779.09 


Acreage  of  lists  patented: 

W yoming,  3  lists . . - . .  7,  640.  91 


Acreage  of  lists  still  pending: 

Idaho . . . . . .  265,602.29 

Montana . . . . . . . . . .  N  one. 

Utah . . . . . . . .  236,467.50 

Washington . . . - . . .  85,456.26 

W  yoming . . :  . .  82, 960.  59 


Total _ _ _ _  670,486.64 


All  but  a  very  small  number  of  the  pending  lists  are  awaiting  the  action  of  the 
States. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  in  many  cases  the  lands  to  be 
reclaimed  are  in  one  State  and  the  reservoir  necessary  for  the  storage 
of  the  water  to  reclaim  the  land  is  in  another  State,  and  thus  an  inter¬ 
state  question  is  involved? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  Very  frequently. 

Mr.  Ray.  IIow  could  the  United  States  go  to  work  and  take  lands 
and  waters  from  one  State  and  give  them  to  another  for  the  benefit  of 
another? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  do  not  understand  that  it  does  so. 

Mr.  Newlands.  The  proposition  is  simply  to  store  the  flood  waters. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  will  illustrate  by  the  case  of  the  land  between 
California  and  Nevada.  The  reservoirs  which  must  be  used  to  irri¬ 
gate  the  lands  of  Nevada  must  be  in  California.  California  can  receive 
no  benefit  from  them. 

Mr.  Ray.  To  whom  do  they  belong? 

Mr.  Maxwell.  The  reservoir  sites  belong  to  the  Government. 
They  are  in  the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


115 


Mr.  Newlands.  But  these  waters  all  belong  to  the  Government. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  In  California  the  Government  controls  all  the  water 
connected  with  the  public  lands. 

Mr.  Ray.  That  raises  a  different  proposition,  providing  those  waters 
you  seek  do  belong  to  the  General  Government.  If  they  belong  to 
the  General  Government,  and  it  is  desirable  to  use  them,  for  instance 
by  the  State  of  Nevada,  for  irrigation  purposes,  then  the  United  States 
Government  would  be  at  perfect  liberty  to  give  Nevada  either  absolute 
fee  and  title  to  the  water  or  to  give  them  the  right  to  use  the  water;  so 
that  in  California  there  is  no  interstate  question  at  all,  because  Cali¬ 
fornia  has  no  right  there  whatever. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  But  California  has  certain  rights.  As  I  understand 
the  first  question,  it  was  how  the  Federal  Government  could  take 
water  from  one  State  to  irrigate  in  another  State.  I  was  illustrating 
that  by  the  conditions  between  the  States  of  California  and  Nevada. 

Mr.  Ray.  The  proposition  of  Mr.  Newlands  was  that  interstate  ques¬ 
tions  were  raised  here,  because  of  the  fact  that  these  waters  were  in 
California,  and  Nevada  needs  them  to  irrigate  its  lands.  Now,  if  that 
is  true,  then  the  United  States  Government  could  not  interfere  and 
could  not  avail  itself  of  the  water.  If  it  is  not  true,  then  there  is  no 
interstate  question  at  all;  it  is  simply  a  question  between  Nevada  and 
the  United  States. 

Mr.  Barham.  There  are  a  whole  lot  of  lakes  there  we  can  take  for 
illustration .  W e  will  not  take  Lake  Tahoe,  because  that  would  involve 
other  interstate  questions;  but  take  these  others.  They  are  owned  by 
the  Government  of  the  LTnited  States.  Now,  we  want  to  put  a  dam  at 
the  outlet  of  one  of  those  lakes.  It  does  not  affect  any  private  inter¬ 
est  at  all  in  California  to  take  water  and  hold  it  there  to  be  run  out 
into  Nevada  for  irrigation  purposes.  But  you  could  not  take  Lake 
Tahoe,  because  that  is  owned  by  private  ownership  on  our  side,  while 
on  the  Nevada  side  I  think  you  have  cut  off  the  timber. 

Mr.  Newlands.  Just  let  me  explain  the  topography  there.  The 
Sierra  Nevada  Mountains  divide  California  from  Nevada.  As  you  go 
along  the  summit  of  the  mountain  there  is  a  slope  toward  California 
and  a  slope  toward  Nevada.  The  places  where  we  propose  to  estab¬ 
lish  reservoirs  are  in  California;  the  lands  to  be  reclaimed  are  in 
Nevada.  All  the  plains,  recollect,  are  in  Nevada;  the  California  side 
is  all  mountainous,  and  all  those  reservoir  sites  are  in  California. 
These  rivers  are  not  navigable,  and  it  is  proposed  to  store  the  flood 
waters,  which  otherwise  flow  into  the  sinks  of  the  desert,  where  they 
can  not  be  utilized.  The  interstate  question  I  suggest  is  this:  That  it 
would  be  difficult  for  the  State  of  Nevada  to  enter  upon  an  enterprise 
of  constructing  reservoirs  in  the  State  of  California.  Assuming  that 
the  National  Government  grants  to  Nevada  the  ownership  of  all  the 
public  lands  on  that  slope  in  California,  why,  then,  this  difficulty  pre¬ 
sents  itself.  Nevada  is  making  an  investment  upon  California  soil. 
As  soon  as  that  property  is  transferred  from  the  Llnited  States  to 
Nevada  it  becomes  property  subject  to  taxation;  as  long  as  it  is  in  the 
ownership  of  the  Federal  Government  it  escapes  taxation.  Now,  my 
judgment  is  that  complications  will  arise,  and  reservoirs  located  in 
California,  but  belonging  to  Nevada,  would  simply  be  taxed  out  of 
existence. 

Mr.  Ray.  One  of  two  things  is  true:  Either  the  waters  and  lands 
that  it  is  desirable  to  utilize  for  irrigation  purposes  in  the  State  of 
Nevada  belong  to  and  are  under  control  of  the  United  States,  or  they 
belong  to  and  are  under  the  control  of  the  State  of  California.  If 


116 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


they  belong  to  and  are  under  the  control  of  the  State  of  California, 
then  the  Government  of  the  United  States  could  not  interfere  and 
could  not  avail  itself  of  it.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  are  under  the 
control  and  belong  to  the  United  States,  then  the  United  States  can 
grant  every  right  it  lias  to  the  State  of  Nevada - 

Mr.  Newlands.  Except  exemption  from  taxation. 

Mr.  Ray.  And  would  not  have  to  pay  a  single  penny  by  way  of  tax¬ 
ation  or  otherwise  to  California,  because  California  can  not  tax  that 
land  if  it  belongs  to  the  United  States. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  But  the  moment  it  grants  it  to  Nevada  it 
can. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  I  think  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  has 
answered  Mr.  Ray’s  question.  In  fact,  the  legal  situation  is  this: 
The  Government  has  all  the  right  with  reference  to  the  water  relative 
to  the  public  land  that  any  riparian  owner  has,  without  regard  to 
State  laws. 

Mr.  Ray.  You  are  referring  to  navigable  waters. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  No;  to  running  streams.  This  is  the  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  in  174  United  States  Reports.  In  the  absence  of 
specific  authority  from  Congress  a  State  can  not,  by  legislation, 
destroy  the  right  of  the  United  States,  as  the  owner  of  lands  border¬ 
ing  on  a  stream,  to  the  continuous  flow  of  its  water,  so  far  at  least  as 
may  be  necessary  for  the  beneficial  uses  of  the  Government  property. 
In  other  words,  the  right  of  the  riparian  owner  attaches  to  all  lands 
owned  by  the  Government,  in  the  hands  of  the  Government,  without 
regard  to  State  lines. 

Mr.  Ray.  'That  is  perfectly  true,  but  it  does  not  need  any  decision 
of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  to  decide  that;  everybody  knows 
that;  that  is  a  right  of  a  riparian  owner.  Now  then  conies  the  other 
question,  even  if  that  be  true,  if  the  United  States  Government  does 
own  that,  it  is  simply  a  holding,  the  Government  would  have  no  right 
whatever,  not  the  slightest  right,  to  divert  .a  single  pint  of  that  water 
into  the  State  of  Nevada  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation  in  the  State  of 
Nevada.  It  is  simply  an  instance  of  the  right  of  the  adjacent  owner, 
and  the  fact  that  the  United  States  owns  land  in  California  bordering 
on  this  stream  does  not  give  it  any  right  whatever  to  take  the  water 
in  that  stream  and  carry  it  into  Nevada  to  irrigate  lands  in  Nevada 
or  any  other  place. 

Mr.  King.  In  the  arid  region,  either  b}7  judicial  decisions  or  com¬ 
mon  law,  the  riparian  right  has  been  abrogated,  and  we  do  not  recog¬ 
nize  the  doctrine  of  riparian  proprietorship,  and  you  may  have  a 
stream  flowing  before  your  door  and  if  you  do  not  appropriate  it  I  can 
go  above  and  appropriate  every  drop  of  it. 

Mr.  Ray.  Then,  if  that  is  your  law,  it  is  in  contradiction  to  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  That  can  not  be  true;  it  is 
impossible  for  that  to  be  true,  because  if  the  United  States  owns  land 
bordering  on  a  stream,  and  this  decision  is  good  for  anything,  then 
the  United  States  Government  has  the  absolute  right  to  have  that 
water  continue  to  run  by  the  side  of  that  land,  and  it  is  entirely  imma¬ 
terial  whether  they  appropriate  it  or  not.  There  is  that  decision. 
Now,  the  fact  that  the  State  has  a  different  law  as  to  itself  and  its 
owners  of  land  does  not  interfere  at  all  with  the  rights  of  the  United 
States  Government. 

Mr.  King.  I  do  not  know  the  decision,  but  in  1806  Congress  enacted 
that  the  local  laws  and  customs  of  the  States  and  Territories  with 
respect  to  the  use  of  water  should  be  recognized  by  the  United  States 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


117 


Government,  and  tlie  decisions  of  the  Federal  courts  have  recognized 
those  local  laws  and  customs. 

Mr.  Ray.  It  must  commend  itself  to  your  common  sense  that  if 
I  own  a  farm  upon  a  stream  in  any  State  of  this  Union — and  I  do 
not  believe  there  is  a  State  that  has  a  law  to  the  contrary — and  the 
water  of  that  stream  runs  through  my  farm,  it  is  entirely  immaterial 
whether  I  use  it  for  milling  purposes  or  any  other  purpose,  to  hold  that 
you,  owning  land  above  me,  2  miles  above,  may  divert  all  that  water 
and  carry  it  off  in  another  direction  and  leave  my  farm  without  water 
for  my  cattle  to  drink,  or  for  me  to  dip  up  for  any  other  farming 
purpose,  would  be  contrary  to  the  primary  rights  of  man. 

Mr.  King.  That  is  precisely  what  I  mean  to  assert;  that  what  you 
state  is  not  the  law. 

Mr.  Ray.  Then  you  could  leave  a  farm  absolutely  dry? 

Mr.  King.  Yes;  if  the  farmer  does  not  use  the  water. 

Mr.  Ray.  Simply  because  he  does  not  divert  the  water,  even  though 
it  is  that  water  that  gives  his  farm  value?  Tell  me  a  State  where  that 
law  prevails. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  The  case  of  the  Livestock  Company  v.  Booth,  in 
California  decides  that  point — that  the  riparian  owner  has  no  more 
right  than  anj-  other  owner.  He  has  the  right  of  use,  but  he  has  no 
right  to  water  that  he  is  not  using. 

Mr.  Ray.  That  is  just  the  point  I  made.  If  that  water  runs  through 
your  farm  and  percolates  into  your  soil,  your  cattle  drink  from  that 
water,  and  you  are  using  it  for  your  ordinary  farming  purposes;  you 
go  down  with  your  bucket,  dip  up  a  pail  of  that  water,  and  it  perco¬ 
lates  into  your  soil  and  it  waters  your  farm.  Now,  then,  the  idea 
that  a  farmer  above  can  divert  all  that  water  for  some  use  of  his 
own  is  contrary  to  the  primary  rights  of  humanity,  and  I  never  heard 
of  such  a  proposition  before. 

Mr.  Newlands.  The  riparian  doctrine  belongs  to  the  wet  region, 
and  this  doctrine  asserted  by  Mr.  King  belongs  to  the  arid  region,  and 
you  will  find  that  beneficial  use  is  the  basis  and  measure  of  the  right 
to  water. 

Mr.  Ray.  Do  you  state,  Mr.  Newlands,  that  that  is  a  law  in  the 
State  of  Nevada? 

Mr.  Newlands.  The  arid  region;  jres,  sir. 

The  Chairman.  If  the  man  above  happens  to  get  title  before  the 
man  below  he  can  appropriate  the  water,  and  then  when  the  man 
below  gets  the  right  to  appropriate  it  it  is  already  gone.  Is  that  true? 

Mr.  King.  No;  my  proposition  is  this:  You  may  have  a  stream 
running  through  your  ground,  and  if  you  do  not  use  it  I  may  go  upon 
the  stream  above  you  forty  j^ears  later  and  appropriate  all  that  water 
if  you  have  not  subjected  it  to  a  beneficial  use;  then  I  can  appro¬ 
priate  that  much  of  the  water  which  you  have  not  so  used. 

Mr.  Barham.  If  you  go  up  above  you  can  only  use  that  which  the 
man  below  has  not  been  using.  The  very  proposition  that  Mr.  Ray 
makes  is  that  the  man  below  has  used  it.  Now,  then,  you  do  not 
mean  to  controvert  that  proposition  at  all,  because  if  the  man  below 
is  using  it  for  irrigation  or  drinking  by  liis  cattle,  or  for  any  other 
purpose,  of  course  you  could  not  run  that  stream  off,  divert  that 
stream  under  any  law  on  earth.  You  did  not  mean  to  sa}T  that. 

Mr.  King.  Oh,  no. 

The  Chairman.  -Suppose  a  dairyman  was  located  on  a  stream  and 
had  10  cows,  and  he  was  appropriating  water  enough  to  water  his  10 
<30 ws.  Do  I  understand  that  a  man  can  go  upon  that  stream  above 


I 


118 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


him  and  appropriate  all  the  water  except  that  which  he  has  been 
using  for  his  10  cows;  and  then,  when  the  dairyman  sets  ready  to 
enlarge  his  dairy,  and  needs  more  water,  that  he  has  no  right  to  use 

any  more? 

«. 

Mr.  King.  That  is  exactly  right.  And  in  some  States  they  do  not 
recognize  the  right  to  use  water  for  drinking  purposes  to  be  superior 
to  the  right  to  use  it  for  agriculture. 

Mr.  Ray.  If  the  Goyernment  owns  a  million  acres  of  land  through 
which  runs  a  fresh- water  stream,  and  it  is  the  only  stream  running 
through  it,  and  the  Goyernment  deeds  to  me  a  thousand  acres  just 
aboye  the  million  acres  it  owns,  do  you  mean  to  say  that  I  liaye  a 
perfect  right  to  divert  that  river  and  carry  it  away  from  the  million 
acres  owned  by  the  Government,  and  that  thereafter,  when  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  sells  that  land,  the  purchasers  must  go  without  water? 

Mr.  King.  That  is  it. 

Mr.  Barham.  I  think,  as  far  as  the  illustration  you  gave  just  now 
is  concerned,  that  in  the  arid-land  region  the  decision  would  be  just 
what  Mr.  Kiug  claims,  because  for  the  same  reason  the  Government 
has  not  appropriated  that  water;  it  has  not  used  it;  it  has  not  begun 
to  use  it.  If  there  were  people  below  there  who  had  used  it.  then  you 
could  not  divert  the  water. 

Mr.  Ray.  Do  you  think,  if  they  sold  to  me  10  acres  of  land  above 
the  million  acres  through  which  the  river  runs,  that  I  thereby  can 
become  the  exclusive  owner  of  the  right  to  use  all  that  water? 

Mr.  Barham.  Xot  unless  you  put  it  to  beneficial  use  on  your  land. 
The  Goyernment  has  not  used  the  water  at  all,  and  it  knows  when  it 
deeds  von  the  thousand  acres  of  land,  or  whatever  it  is,  that  you  can 
not  use  that  land  unless  you  have  a  right  to  divert  that  water.  But 

i/  o 

the  proposition  you  started  out  with  is  elementary,  and  I  admit  the 
law. 

Mr.  Ray.  You  have  a  right  to  divert  that  water  as  it  flows  through 

c*  c 

vour  land  for  the  ordinary  uses  of  that  land,  if  von  do  not  unnecessa- 
rily  detain  it,  but  when  it  trasses  on  you  must  restore  it  to  the  original 
stream  for  the  beneficial  use  of  the  owners  below. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  That  is  not  the  law  in  the  arid  region. 

Mr.  Barham.  There  is  no  doubt  that  you  are  right  about  the  ele- 
mentary  principle  of  common  law. 

Mr.  Xewlands.  Yes,  that  is  common  law,  but  not  the  law  of  the 
arid  region. 

Mr.  Barham  (continuing).  But  you  forget  this:  The  use  of  that 
water  is  for  irrigation,  and  you  own  the  thousand  acres  of  land,  and 
you  have  the  right  to  take  all  the  water  which  is  a  profitable  use  of 
the  water,  all  that  is  necessary  for  the  irrigation  of  the  thousand 
acres,  and  turn  back  the  balance. 

Mr.  Ray.  You  must  restore  it,  must  you  not,  to  the  original  stream? 

Mr.  Barham.  Yes;  there  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

Mr.  Ray.  In  other  words,  you  can  turn  it  out  into  channels  on  vour 
own  land,  but  those  channels  must  come  back. 

Mr.  Wilson.  Sometimes  it  is  carried  away  for  distances  of  over 

•7 

50  miles. 

Mr.  King.  You  never  restore  it  at  all  and  you  do  not  have  to  do  so 

V 

under  the  law  in  the  West.  In  this  contrast  Pomeroy  on  Riparian 
Rights  and  Mr.  Gould  and  you  will  see  the  difference  between  the 
commou  law  and  the  law  of  the  arid-land  regions. 

The  Chairman.  Take  another  view — a  situation  which  is  expected 
to  arise  very  frequently.  Suppose  a  homestead  settler  in  your  State, 
or  in  Utah,  should  start  to  go  into  the  fruit  business,  and  he  begins 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


119 


in  a  small  way  and  finally  succeeds  in  getting  an  orchard  of  5  acres. 
It  is  all  his  means  will  permit.  Now,  while  he  gets  his  orchard  of  5 
acres  and  turns  the  water  on  it,  I  understand  that  the  riparian  owners 
above  can  use  all  the  water  except  the  amount  he  needs  for  his  5  acres, 
and  when  he  gets  ready  to  make  an  addition  to  his  orchard,  to  culti¬ 
vate  10  acres,  he  can  not  get  the  water  for  it.  I  think  that  is  a  fair 
illustration,  just  like  the  illustration  of  the  dairyman. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  The  State  legislature  has  provided  how  water 
shall  be  appropriated,  and  there  are  various  steps  to  it  in  different 
States.  In  our  State,  for  instance,  you  will  file  a  regulation  notice 
for  so  many  cubic  feet  per  second,  enough  to  irrigate  your  land.  You 
commence  to  divert  that  water,  and  you  are  given  a  reasonable  time 
to  divert  it,  and  what  that  reasonable  time  is  of  course  differs  with 
each  case.  But  you  must  pursue  it  with  reasonable  diligence,  and  of 
course  you  must  reclaim  your  land  with  reasonable  diligence. 

Mr.  King.  Mr.  Chairman,  if  you  should  go  there  and  start  your 
garden  of  5  acres  and  construct  a  ditch  only  large  enough  to  irrigate 
5  acres,  and  it  was  found  from  your  outward  conduct  that  that  was 
all  you  intended  to  appropriate,  then  I  could  go  above  you  a  year 
afterwards,  or  a  day  afterwards,  and  take  all  the  balance  of  the  stream 
for  my  use. 

The  Chairman.  However,  if  I  started  a  garden  or  an  orchard,  I 
would  be  allowed  what  water  I  needed,  and  notice  would  be  taken  of 
my  intentions  and  conduct  in  the  way  of  enlarging  my  production. 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  We  do  not  have  to  restore  it  to  the  stream. 
Sometimes  we  divert  water  for  50  miles  and  pass  hundreds  of  home¬ 
steads.  The  theory  of  returning  to  the  stream  is  entirely  abandoned, 
ex  necessitate  re,  on  account  of  the  conditions  which  exist.  That 
idea  of  returning  the  water  to  the  stream  has  been  done  away  with, 
that  right  has  been  abrogated,  and  the  circuit  court  of  appeals  of 
San  Francisco  has  affirmed  the  law  we  had  in  that  respect.  I  tried 
the  case  in  which  that  was  decided,  and  am  familiar  with  it. 

The  Chairman.  Another  question.  Under  these  State  laws  can 
the  owners  appropriate  all  water,  so  that  subsequent  homestead  set¬ 
tlers  upon  public  land  that  is  now  unoccupied  will  have  no  right  to 
the  water? 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  Absolutely.  It  is  done  over  the  whole  arid 
region. 

The  Chairman,  Is  not  that  a  serious  matter  to  consider  when  the 
Government  undertakes  to  construct  these  reservoirs?  Is  there  not 
danger  in  constructing  these  reservoirs  to  store  water  that  may  be 
used  by  owners  before  it  gets  there? 

Mr.  Wilson,  of  Idaho.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  difficulty 
about  that.  People  go  there  to  farm,  say,  50,000  acres  of  land,  and 
they  find  there  is  only  sufficient  water  to  irrigate  10,000  acres,  and 
they  find  that  this  10,000  acres  is  where  the  water  comes  out  of  the 
canyon,  and  so  they  locate  there.  You  can  see  what  the  result  would 
be  if  you  did  not  permit  such  a  law  as  that — if  you  did  not  permit  the 
first  man  upon  the  stream  to  use  the  water. 

Mr.  Barham.  Take  an  illustration  that  frequently  occurs  in  Cali¬ 
fornia.  Here  are  ditches  filled  with  water,  and  the  water  is  appro¬ 
priated,  all  the  water — all  the  water  that  can  be  conserved  in  the 
mountains  by  any  bill  that  has  been  introduced  here.  Now,  if  we 
build  a  dam  up  here  in  the  mountains  to  conserve  the  flood  waters, 
how  are  you  going  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  simply  feeding  the 
ditches  and  the  appropriation  of  water  that  has  already  been  made? 

Mr.  King.  The  Government  before  it  builds  a  dam  for  conservation 


120 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


purposes  must  ascertain  the  maximum  appropriation  of  all  the  pro¬ 
prietors,  by  common  measurement,  and  then  it  can  not  have  anything 
until  those  people  have  that  maximum  flow.  All  above  that  would 
be  the  Government’s,  because  it  then  would  be  the  proprietor. 

Mr.  Barham.  How  can  you  make  that  out? 

Mr.  King.  You  have  to  make  the  measurements. 

Mr.  Barham.  I  don’t  mean  that;  that  is  easy.  But  how  can  you 
make  out,  if  the  Government  constructs  a  reservoir  here  and  catches 
the  flood  water,  how  can  you  make  out  that  they  will  not  be  required 
to  let  those  flood  waters  into  the  stream? 

Mr.  King.  They  have  got  them,  then,  by  being  the  proprietor.  Our 
laws  recognize  an  appropriation  in  July,  an  appropriation  in  August, 
and  an  appropriation  in  May  upon  the  same  stream.  Many  men  have 
rights  to  water  in  May  and  do  not  have  any  rights  to  the  water  in  July. 

Mr.  Barham.  But  you  have  to  divert  the  water  where  the  ditches 
are  all  ready  to  divert  it. 

Mr.  Ray.  If  the  theory  advanced  is  true,  you  advance  an  argument 
that  would  knock  this  whole  scheme  in  the  head  at  once.  This  ink- 
stand,  we  will  say,  is  a  reservoir  of  water;  all  the  water  available  is 
turned  into  the  reservoir.  Here  are  millions  of  acres  of  land  immedi¬ 
ately  below  that  that  the  Government  purposes  to  irrigate  and  pur¬ 
poses  to  sell  for  homesteads;  they  get  around  the  water  in  here  and 
open  up  their  ditches;  they  sell  to  a  few  men  up  here  [indicating] 
10,000  acres,  and  then  thej’  sell  to  these  people  down  here,  and  they 
commence  irrigation  and  it  uses  up  all  the  water  to  irrigate  these 
little  farms  up  here,  covering  a  tenth  of  it,  or  may  be  a  quarter  of  it. 
The  rest  of  it  goes  dry.  These  men  have  no  benefit  whatever;  or,  if 
you  undertake  the  whole,  then  it  is  not  sufficient  to  irrigate  the  whole 
and  you  render  the  whole  worthless  and  your  whole  scheme  goes 
wrong. 

Mr.  Reeder.  When  they  build  that  reservoir  they  know  what 
they  can  irrigate  and  they  irrigate  every  foot  they  propose  to  and  no 
more. 

Mr.  King.  I  can  give  you  an  illustration  of  a  stream  that  irrigates 
2,000  acres  of  ground  in  June  and  July  and  about  3,000  acres  in  May 
and  April.  If  we  had  enough  land  there  close  by  we  could  irrigate  7,000 
or  8,000  acres  in  April  and  May;  and  if  we  could  store  that  water  and 
let  it  come  down  later,  instead  of  only  having  enough  for  2,000  acres 
later  in  the  season  we  could  irrigate  5,000  or  6,000  acres.  The  Gov¬ 
ernment  knows  now  that  the  maximum  appropriation  of  water  upon 
that  stream  is  3,000  acres  in  high  water  and  2,000  acres  in  low  water. 
It  knows  it  has  the  right  by  husbanding  the  water  to  have  all  the 
surplus  which  it  husbands;  therefore  it  has  got  to  figure  upon  giving 
to  those  people  there  3,000  acres  in  spring  and  enough  for  2,000  in 
August;  but  all  the  balance  it  can  h&ve  and  do  what  it  pleases  with, 
and  b}r  building  a  reservoir  it  can  store  enough  to  have  5,000  in  July. 

Mr.  Ray.  Who  is  to  have  the  first  right  to  water  out  of  these  reser¬ 
voirs  on  these  public  lands? 

Mr.  King.  Whoever  the  Government  determines.  If  the  Govern¬ 
ment  builds  a  reservoir  it  can  determine  who  shall  be  the  beneficiaries, 
who  shall  be  the  beneficial  users  and  have  the  usufruct. 

The  Chairman.  The  Government  would  be  the  proprietor  under 
your  law? 

Mr.  King.  Yes. 

The  Chairman.  You  would  not  have  to  carry  it  on  the  land? 

Mr.  King.  But  I  think  if  the  Government  manifested  no  disposition 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


121 


to  sell  it  or  lease  it,  it  would  be  appropriated,  and  the  first  ones  would 
have  it. 

Mr.  Reeder.  And  some  of  these  big  companies  could  appropriate 
that  water  and  thus  make  it  profitable  to  them,  immensely  so,  but  we 
are  trying  to  provide  that  no  man  can  appropriate  over  80  acres. 

Mr.  King.  Yet  the  law  recognizes  a  reasonable  time  for  the  man  to 
get  the  water  and  convert  it  to  his  use — to  get  the  land  and  appropri¬ 
ate  the  water. 

Mr.  Ray.  Does  not  this  land  that  you  propose  to  irrigate  take  up 
water  very  rapidly? 

Mr.  King.  Yes,  some  of  it  does;  some  is  clay  soil. 

Mr.  Wilson.  Generally  speaking,  it  does. 

Mr.  Ray.  In  most  localities  there  is  not  much  limit  to  the  amount 
it  will  take  up? 

Mr.  King.  That  is  it,  but  little  by  little  the  requisitions  by  the  land 
for  water  are  less  and  less.  I  know  some  land  that  once  had  to  be  irri¬ 
gated  to-day  has  to  be  drained. 

Mr.  Ray.  And  those  lands  up  there  would  absorb  a  great  deal  more 
water  than  they  needed? 

Mr.  King.  No,  the  law  forbids  the  application  of  more  than  is  being 
used,  and  if  it  was  being  wasted  it  would  not  be  regarded  as  a  bene¬ 
ficial  use  and  the  owner  would  be  enjoined. 

Mr.  Reeder.  Another  thing.  They  measure  that  water  as  certainly 
as  you  can  measure  oats  you  feed  your  horse. 

Mr.  King.  They  estimate  that  so  many  inches  of  water  running  a 
certain  length  of  time  will  irrigate  a  certain  amount  of  land,  and 
above  that  it  is  waste,  and  the  courts  now  are  holding  the  irrigators 
down  to  the  scientific  testimony  as  to  the  use  of  water  upon  the  land. 
The  last  case  I  tried  involving  that  question  brought  out  testimonj^  to 
show  what  the  use  of  the  water  was.  Those  men  said  that  tliej7'  should 
have  so  much  water  and  then  experts  went  on  the  stand  and  said 
“one-half  of  that  is  sufficient,”  and  cut  the  farmers  down  one-lialf. 

Mr.  Maxwell.  It  seems  to  me  this  discussion  illustrates  very  much 
more  strongly  than  any  argument  I  can  make  that  if  you  undertake 
to  imagine  difficulties  you  can  imagine  more  in  a  day  than  can  be 
explained  in  a  thousand  years;  and  we  will  never  get  the  problem 
solved,  because  there  will  always  be  some  new  difficulty  suggested. 
If  you  will  take  it  up  b}^  localities  and  go  on  the  ground  and  find  the 
actual  place,  rather  than  imagine  it,  you  can  find  more  places  where 
this  law  can  be  put  in  force  and  the  land  be  reclaimed  than  you  can 
accomplish  in  the  way  of  reclamation,  b}7  this  other  theory,  in  ten 
years.  I  earnestly  urge  that  this  be  made  the  keynote  of  this  dis¬ 
cussion. 

Take  the  one  point  brought  here — the  rights  of  the  riparian  owner. 
This  whole  question  was  brought  up  and  decided  in  the  Lux  case  in 
California.  That  case  occupied  many  months  and  cost  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  dollars  before  it  was  settled.  They  decided  that  while 
the  law  recognized  riparian  rights  existing  in  California,  they  whit¬ 
tled  it  away,  and  it  only  exists  as  a  fiction  because  the  Supreme 
Court  has  lately  decided  that  the  limit  of  the  riparian  owner’s  rights 
is  the  limit  of  his  beneficial  use. 

I  have  told  you  what  you  could  do  in  Arizona — that  you  could  take 
land  there  which  is  now  a  desert  and  make  it  worth  millions  of  dol¬ 
lars,  and  that  the  Government  could  get  the  money  back  as  fast  as 
they  can  reclaim  the  land. 

Take  it  over  in  California.  Judge  Barham  referred  to  a  place  yes- 


122 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


terclay  where  there  is  not  a‘  drop  of  water  used  to-day — a  place  that  is 
simply  a  natural  reservoir.  You  can  take  the  water  there  out  of  a 
tunnel  and  turn  it  into  a  valley — the  Honey  Lake  Y alley — simply  take 
it  out  of  the  mouth  of  your  tunnel  into  a  narrow  mountain  stream. 
There  are  no  complications  to  he  met  with  there  at  all.  That  is  Gov¬ 
ernment  land,  and  you  dig  your  canal  out  there  and  there  are  no 
intervening  rights,  no  complications;  you  decide  how  much  land  you 
will  irrigate,  and  you  simply  put  the  water  on  it.  There  are  many 
such  cases.  If  we  can  not  commence  with  the  easy  places  we  will 
never  get  through  all  the  complications  that  have  been  suggested 
among  the  reasons  why  the  States  and  private  capital  have  not  suc¬ 
ceeded.  The  question  was  asked  yesterday,  “Why  can  not  private 
capita]  do  this?”  For  two  reasons;  first,  because  the  majority  of  cases 
will  not  be  a  profit  to  the  investor  as  such,  and  private  capital  seeks 
a  profit.  In  an  irrigation  scheme  there  is  first  a  promoter’s  profit, 
then  an  investor’s  profit,  then  a  bond-buyer’s  profit,  then  the  interest 
charges ;  and  before  they  have  the  first  settler  on  the  land  the  price 
of  the  land  is  so  high  they  can  not  pay  it,  and  they  go  into  bankruptcy. 
That  has  been  the  experience  of  one  case  after  another.  Another 
reason.  The  law  of  the  arid  region  to-day  is — and  in  the  State  of 
California,  if  you  go  there  to-day,  they  will  tell  you  that  is  the  chief 
reason  why  private  capital  will  not  build  irrigation  works,  that  no  law 
on  earth  will  lead  the  people  of  California  to  forsake  that  constitutional 
provision.  They  would  rather  that  no  money  would  come  there  and 
be  invested  than  to  put  the  chain  around  their  necks  that  the  water 
company  owns  the  water.  They  would  rather  that  no  more  works  be 
built,  and  they  will  say  to  those  companies,  “Keep  your  money;  we 
do  not  want  your  investment,”  rather  than  give  up  their  constitutional 
right. 

That  is  the  condition,  those  are  the  reasons.  You  can  go  into  any 
State  and  the  Government  can  come  in  and  build  these  works  and 
take  the  water  out  in  main  line  canals,  so  that  the  settlers  can  do 
what  the  early  settlers  did  in  Utah,  what  they  did  in  California  in  the 
San  Joaquin  Valley,  what  they  did  in  Idaho — dig  their  own  ditches 
and  put  the  water  on  the  land  and  raise  crops  and  get  rich ;  and  it  was 
when  that  reached  its  limit,  when  that  could  not  be  done  any  more, 
that  they  began  to  get  into  trouble,  and  it  began  to  be  developed  that 
private  capital  could  not  control  these  works  and  do  what  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  has  to  do. 

What  is  it  that  we  ask  the  Government  to  do?  Nothing  more  than 
what  nature  did  for  the  early  settlers.  Store  the  flood  waters,  take 
the  waters  that  can  not  be  taken  from  these  great  canyons  and  rivers 
by  private  capital  out  upon  the  prairie  by  the  main-line  ditches,  so 
that  the  people  can  go  there  and  put  their  plows  in  the  ground.  That 
is  it. 

One  advocate  says  the  Government  should  carry  water  to  the  point 
where  private  enterprise  can  handle  the  water.  What  private  enter¬ 
prise?  The  land  speculator  or  the  settler?  I  say  the  settler.  I  say 
that  it  is  the  duty  of  this  Government  that  it  owes  its  people  to-day 
to  put  that  great  domain  in  shape  so  that  men  who  have  knowledge 
and  industry  and  strong  right  arms,  such  as  the  earlier  settlers  had, 
can  go  there  and  build  their  own  ditches,  and  that  is  what  they  will 
do  when  the  Government  builds  these  reservoirs. 

But  what  would  be  the  case  in  Wyoming  to-day  if  the  Government 
should  build  these  reservoirs?  There  is  comparatively  little  land  in 
Wyoming  or  any  other  State  where,  if  the  State  builds  nothing  but  a 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


123 


reservoir,  the  settler  can  get  a  drop  of  it.  The  speculator  would  get 
iu  and  by  some  proposition  build  a  great  canal  and  take  a  profit  out 
of  the  farm — tax  the  farmers  for  that  to  such  an  extent  that  it  will 
take  them  a  generation  to  earn  that.  What  the  Government  should 
do  is  to  bring  the  water  to  a  point  where  the  farmers  can  build  their 
own  canals  and  use  it  throughout  their  farms  and  homes. 

In  conclusion,  I  wish  to  call  attention  to  an  extract  from  a  report 
by  Hon.  Charles  D.  Walcott,  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey, 
relating  to  the  bill  introduced  by  Mr.  Newlands  (H.  R.  14088).  This 
brings  out  clearly  some  of  the  reasons  why,  in  the  opinion  of  an  officer 
of  the  executive  branch  of  the  Government,  such  a  bill  would  be  of 
immediate  advantage. 

EXTRACT  FROM  REPORT  BY  HON.  CHARLES  D.  WALCOTT,  DIRECTOR 

UNITED  STATES  GEOLOGICAL  SURVEY. 

The  bill  provides  for  the  beginning  of  reclamation  by  the  use  of 
funds  derived  from  the  country  in  which  the  works  are  to  be  built. 
It  also  sets  a  limit  to  the  expenditure  and  permits  the  stead}^  growth 
by  the  refunding  of  expenditures  and  continual  addition,  making  pos¬ 
sible  a  systematic  and  economical  development.  Even  though  the 
amount  available  for  construction  should  at  first  be  small,  it  is  appar¬ 
ent  that  the  ultimate  outgrowth  will  be  large  and  that  the  reclaimed 
lands  will  be  offered  to  the  public  so  gradually  that  there  will  be  no 
disturbance  of  industrial  conditions. 

There  has  been  in  the  past  an  apprehension  that  the  reclamation  of 
the  arid  public  domain  would  bring  the  agricultural  lands  of  the  W est 
into  competition  with  those  of  the  East.  This  fear  has  been  due  to 
ignorance  of  the  fact  that  the  products  from  irrigated  lands  are  essen¬ 
tially  different  from  those  fi;om  humid  lands,  and  do  not  reach  the 
same  market;  but  even  if  there  should  be  competition  along  a  few 
lines,  this  will  not  be  injurious,  if  brought  about  by  slow,  systematic 
development  contemplated  through  the  arid-land  reclamation  fund. 

Attention  is  called  to  the  fact  that  the  bill  under  consideration  does 
not  provide  for  maintenance  and  final  disposal  of  the  works.  It  may 
be  wise  at  the  present  time  not  to  attempt  to  solve  this  class  of  prob¬ 
lems,  as  it  will  probably  be  several  years  after  such  a  bill  is  passed 
before  they  will  arise.  In  the  meantime,  experience  will  have  been 
acquired,  so  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  can  make  definite  rec¬ 
ommendations  growing  out  of  thorough  consideration  of  the  problems. 

The  investigations  which  have  been  carried  on  by  the  United  States 
Geological  Survey,  extending  over  a  period  of  thirteen  years,  have  been 
mainly  in  the  line  of  ascertaining  the  facts  as  to  the  possibilities  of 
reclamation,  such  as  the  flow  of  streams  and  location  of  reservoir  sites. 
As  the  outgrowth  of  this  long-continued  study,  it  seems  desirable  that 
some  plan-,  such  as  that  proposed  by  the  bill  under  discussion,  be  fol¬ 
lowed  to  bring  about  gradual  reclamation  of  lands  susceptible  of 
reclamation,  but  which  can  not  be  utilized  if  dependence  is  placed 
upon  private  or  corporate  enterprise.  There  are  many  localities  where 
work  of  this  kind  may  be  undertaken  as  the  need  and  opportunity 
arises. 

While  there  are  many  places  where  the  Government  can  reclaim 
public  land,  there  are  also  other  localities  where  the  water  supply  must 
be  regulated  in  order  to  render  possible  the  full  development  of  the 
land  now  in  wdiole  or  in  part  in  private  ownership.  Where  such  con¬ 
ditions  exist,  it  is  apparent  that  such  a  bill  does  not  apply.  On  long 


124 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


rivers,  like  the  Platte  and  Arkansas,  whose  waters  even  in  time  of 
ordinary  hood  have  been  appropriated,  there  is  no  probability  that 
return  can  be  made  to  the  reclamation  fund,  and  a  different  treatment 
must  be  accorded. 

There  is  still  another  class  of  conditions  where  the  Government  is  a 
considerable  landowner,  the  public  lands  being  interspersed  with  areas 
in  private  possession.  Here  it  often  occurs  that  the  water  rights  are 
exceedingly  complicated,  and,  as  pointed  out  by  the  experts  who  have 
been  studying  the  laws  and  institutions  of  irrigated  countries,  there  is 
necessity  for  mutual  adjustment  and  understanding  before  the  irriga¬ 
ble  area  can  be  increased  through  water  storage.  The  possibility  of 
building  storage  works  would  act  as  the  strongest  conceivable  induce¬ 
ment  for  these  people  to  unite  to  secure  equitable  distribution  of  the 
water  under  existing  laws,  thus  enabling  the  Interior  Department  to 
know  definitely  what  claims  exist  prior  to  those  which  may  be  acquired 
from  the  water  stored  in  the  reservoir. 

The  object  to  be  attained  by  legislation  proposed  by  these  bills  is 
evidently  that  of  bringing  within  reach  of  new  settlers  upon  the  public 
domain  a  permanent  water  supply,  such  as  that  found  by  the  pioneers. 
They  had  merely  to  take  out  canals  and  diverting  ditches  and  thus 
enjoy  a  priority  of  supply  now  guaranteed  by  custom  and  law.  These 
opportunities  have  been  utilized,  and  the  later  comers  find  themselves 
confronted  with  a  task  enormously  greater  than  that  of  their  prede¬ 
cessors  and  far  beyond  their  means.  It  is  possible  to  bring  about, 
through  storage  and  water  conservation,  conditions  resembling  those 
encountered  by  the  first  settlers  and  make  possible  a  steady  influx  of 
population,  who  by  united  effort  can  take  the  waters  artificially  regu¬ 
lated  and  carry  them  to  their  lands.  In  other  words,  the  operations 
of  these  proposed  bills  create  conditions.which  will  give  to  the  settlers 
on  these  arid  lands  a  sufficient  water  supply  on  easy  terms,  thus  ena¬ 
bling  them  to  make  homes  and  with  their  own  labor  and  teams  build 
the  distributing  canals  and  laterals  necessary  to  bring  the  water  to 
the  land. 

The  advantage  of  bills  of  the  character  proposed  is  that  it  enables 
a  development  of  the  country  without  disturbing  the  existing  status 
or  awakening  justifiable  uneasiness  as  to  future  conditions.  There 
has  grown  up  in  irrigated  countries  a  fear  that  the  existing  priorities 
of  water  rights  may  be  disturbed  by  the  building  of  new  and  larger 
systems  of  irrigation.  If  the  Government,  in  pursuance  of  a  policy 
to  permit  the  increase  of  homes  on  the  public  lands,  proposes  to  build 
reservoirs,  every  reasonable  assurance  should  be  given  the  people 
already  settled  that  they  have  nothing  to  fear,  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  their  vested  rights  and  existing  customs  will  be  guarded  and  not 
disturbed  b}r  the  bringing  under  irrigation  of  additional  areas  of 
fertile  but  arid  land. 

It  has  often  been  pointed  out  that  increase  of  irrigated  areas  and 
extension  of  irrigation  upon  the  public  lands  is  now  to  a  certain 
extent  prevented  by  local  jealousies  and  defective  methods  of  distri¬ 
bution  of  the  water,  and  that  a  larger  prosperity  would  be  enjoyed  if 
by  any  means  the  farmers  along  a  stream  could  be  induced  to  adjust 
their  differences  under  some  system  of  local  control,  such  as  that 
which  exists  in  a  few  of  the  arid-land  States.  There  could  be  no 
stronger  inducement  held  out  to  the  States  and  to  the  irrigators  to 
perfect  the  local  control  than  the  understanding  that  water  conserva¬ 
tion  would  begin  only  when  such  efficient  local  control  had  been 
provided. 


ARID  LANDS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


125 


The  proposed  bills  do  not  provide  for  the  charging  of  interest  nor 
for  the  hasty  pushing  forward  of  the  works  to  completion  in  order  to 
bring  about  an  early  return,  such  as  is  essential  to  the  success  of 
corporate  enterprise.  In  such  matters  private  capital  is  concerned 
with  obtaining  the  largest  return  for  the  smallest  expenditure,  while 
the  spirit  of  the  bills  under  consideration  is  evidently  to  bring  about 
the  largest  development  and  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number 
consistent  with  an  economical  expenditure.  As  a  result  it  appears 
from  the  examinations  already  made  that  where  private  capital  would 
find  it  expedient  to  reclaim,  say,  a  thousand  acres  from  a  given  source 
in  order  to  make  the  largest  return,  the  Government  works,  built 
with  a  view  to  the  best  development  of  the  country,  might  reclaim 
ultimately  two  or  three  times  as  much. 

From  the  very  moment  that  private  capital  is  raised  and  surveys 
are  begun  up  to  the  time  that  the  works  are  completed  the  interest 
charges  accrue  and  must  be  met  out  of  the  proceeds  of  the  enterprise. 
So  that  it  several  years  are  spent  in  preliminary  work  and  in  final 
construction  the  accrued  interest  may  add  from  10  to  50  per  cent  to 
the  total  cost.  Such  charges,  it  is  assumed,  are  not  contemplated 
against  the  reclamation  fund,  and  thus,  although  the  works  built  by 
this  fund  may  be  more  elaborate  and  permanent  than  those  built  by 
corporations,  yet  from  these  considerations  it  is  apparent  that  in  the 
long  run  they  need  not  be  more  expensive.  From  this  consideration 
it  appears,  as  before  noted,  that  thousands,  or  even  millions,  of  acres 
can  be  reclaimed  under  laws  of  this  character  where  corporate  enter¬ 
prise  would  not  enter,  or  at  most  undertake  the  work  in  a  small  way, 
reclaiming  only  a  portion  of  the  total  area. 


INDEX. 


Page. 


Agricultural  Department,  irrigation  inves¬ 
tigations  of,  appropriations  and  leg¬ 
islation  for .  49-51 

Alabama,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Appropriations,  inland  commerce . 79-80 

investigations  of  water  resources  of 

United  States . 43-53 

irrigating  ditches  (Indian  Office) .  49 

irrigation  investigations  (Department  of 

Agriculture)  .  51 

irrigation  .surveys  (Geological  Survey) .  45 

reservoirs  on  headwaters  of  Mississippi 

River  (River  and  Harbor) .  21 

stream  measurements  (Geological  Sur¬ 
vey)  .  46 

Appropriations  proposed .  5-7, 

12, 13, 14, 17-19, 53-54,  74-75, 85-86 

Arid  and  semiarid  region,  acreage  of .  13 

irrigable  land  in .  13 

pasturage  in .  13 

Arid  and  semiarid  States  and  Territories, 

list  of .  7 

Arid-land-grant  commission  of  Montana, 

powers  of .  113 

Arid-land-reclamation  fund,  text  of  bill 

providing  for .  6-7 

Arid  lands,  Government  ownership  of,  ex¬ 
tent  of .  35 

Arid  States,  population  possible  in .  25-26 

reservoir  sites  in . . .  25-26 

Arizona,  appropriation  proposed  for  storage 

works  in .  17 

appropriation  proposed  for  surveys  and 

investigations  in .  18 

irrigable  land  in . . .  109, 110 

irrigation  methods  pursued  in .  90 

irrigation  in,  feasibility  and  value  of. . .  32, 

34-35, 36-37 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77, 93 

reclamation  in,  by  individuals .  14 

reservoir  proposed  on  Gila  River  in,  cost 

and  capacity  of .  30 

reservoir  proposed  on  Gila  River  in,  dis¬ 
cussion  of .  95, 96-97, 105-106, 109 

reservoir  proposed  on  Gila  River  in,  leg¬ 
islation  regarding .  57 

reservoir  proposed  on  Gila  River  in,  text 

of  bill  for  construction  of .  74-75 

reservoir  surveys  and  artesian  investi¬ 
gations  in,  estimated  cost  of .  53 


T’age. 

Arkansas,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 

swamp  lands  ceded  to . '. . .  77-78 

Arkansas  River,  character  of  water  of .  40 

diversion  of  waters  of .  124 

seepage  along .  26 

Arkansas  Valley,  underground  waters  in  ..  38-41 
Artesian  waters.  See  Underground  waters. 
Artesian  wells,  appropriations  for  construc¬ 
tion  of .  47,48,49-50,51 

cost  of  sinking .  39, 40 

Barham,  Hon.  J.  A.,  bill  introduced  by,  dis¬ 
cussion  of .  94 

remarks  by .  9, 

10, 16-17, 19-20,  33, 56, 59,  60-61,  67,  68, 72, 73- 
74,  84,  96,  100,  101,  102,  .106, 115, 117, 118, 119 

Bills  introduced,  text  of _  5-7, 17-19, 61-62, 74-75 

California,  appropriations  proposed  for  stor¬ 
age  works  and  investigations  in  ... .  18 

inland  commerce  in,  appropriations  for  79 

population  in  sections  of .  110 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  sites  in .  27, 28 

reservoir  surveys  contemplated  in,  esti¬ 
mated  cost  of .  53 

reservoirs  built  by  Government  in .  21 

reservoirs  proposed  in,  cost  and  capac¬ 
ity  of  .  28-29, 30 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

underground  waters  in,  estimated  cost 

of  examination  and  mapping  of _  53 

California  arid  Nevada,  forest  reserve  in 

Truckee  River  Basin  in,  need  of...  29 

water  storage  in,  interstate  complica¬ 
tions  of .  27-28,100-102,114-115 

Canals  built  by  Government .  79-80 

Carey  Act,  features  and  workings  of .  66, 83, 

103, 110-111, 113-114 

text  of .  111-112 

Colorado,  appropriations  proposed  for  stor¬ 
age  works  and  investigations  in. . . .  18 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of. .  53 

underground  waters  in .  38-42 

underground  waters  in,  estimated  cost 

of  examination  and  mapping  of _  53 

Connecticut,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79 

Cost  of  artesian  wells .  39, 40 

Cost  of  reclamation .  13-14,  24,  25,  26,  55,  66 

Dakota,  underground  waters  in .  38-12 

Dakota  sandstone,  extent  and  characters  of.  38-42 

127 


128 


INDEX. 


Page. 


Darton,  N.  H.,  statement  of .  87-42 

Delaware,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 

District  of  Columbia,  inland  commerce  in, 

appropriations  for .  79 

Florida,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Forest  reserves  in  United  States,  data  re¬ 
garding .  72 

Forests,  effect  of,  on  water  storage . 72-74 

preservation  of,  amount  expended  an¬ 
nually  for .  72 

preservation  of,  value  of .  21-22,  72-74 

Geological  Survey,  irrigation  surveys  and 

investigations  by .  43-46 

irrigation  surveys  and  investigations 

by,  appropriations  for .  45, 48 

powers  of .  43-45 

reservoir  surveys  by .  28-30,  94-95 

stream  measurements  by,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  46,48 

Georgia,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 

Gila  River,  Ariz.,  reservoir  proposed  on, 

cost  and  capacity  of .  30 

reservoir  proposed  on,  legislation  re¬ 
garding .  57 

reservoir  proposed  on,  text  of  bill  for 

construction  of . 74-75 

reservoir  survey  on,  discussion  of..  95,  96-97, 

105-106,  109 

Governmental  reclamation  of  lands  in 

foreign  countries .  78 

Grazing  lands,  acreage  of .  93 

Humboldt  River,  Nev.,  characteristics  of  . .  15 

irrigation  possibilities  of .  15 

reservoirs  proposed  on,  text  of  bill  cov¬ 
ering  construction  of .  5-6 

water  storage  and  irrigation  works  on, 

discussion  of .  7-8 

water  storage  and  irrigation  works  on, 

text  of  bill  providing  for .  5-6 

Humboldt  River  (Lower),  Nev.,  reservoirs 

proposed  on,  cost  and  capacity  of  ..  30 

Idaho,  agricultural  development  and  possi¬ 
bilities  of .  26-27 

appropriations  proposed  for  investiga¬ 
tions  in .  18 

inland  commerce  in,  appropriations  for.  79 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of. .  53 

underground  waters  in .  42 

Illinois,  inland  commerce  in,  appropriations 

for .  79,80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Indiana,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Indian  Office,  irrigating  ditches  constructed 
by,  legislation  and  appropriations 

for .  46-49 

Inland  commerce  in  United  States,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79-80 

Iowa,  inland  commerce  in,  appropriations 

for .  79,80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 


,  Page. 

Irrigable  land  in  arid  and  semiarid  region.  13 

Irrigation  ditches  constructed  by  Indian 

Office,  appropriations  for .  49 

legislation  for .  46-49 

Irrigation  investigations  by  Department  of 

Agriculture,  appropriations  for  ....  51 

legislation  for .  49-51 

Irrigation  surveys  and  investigations  by 
Geological  Survey,  appropriations 

for .  45,48,51 

history  of .  43-46 

Jenkins,  Hon.  J.  J.,  remarks  by .  9-10, 11, 13 

Kansas,  appropriation  proposed  for  drilling 

test  well  in .  18 

artesian  test  well  proposed  in,  estimated 

cost  of  drilling  . . . .' . 54 

inland  commerce  in,  appropriations 

for .  79 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

underground  waters  in . 38-42 

Kentucky,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

King,  Hon.  W.  H.,  remarks  by .  58, 

102-103, 106, 107, 116-117, 118, 119-121 
Lake  Tahoe,  Cal. -Nev.,  diversion  and  utili¬ 
zation  of .  27-28, 83 

Louisiana,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to . : . 77-78 

Lower  Humboldt  River,  Nev.,  reservoirs 

proposed  on,  cost  and  capacity  of  ..  30 

Maine,  inland  commerce  in,  appropriations 

for .  79 

Maryland,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 

Massachusetts,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79 

Maxwell,  Geo.  H,,  statements  of .  31-37, 

94-99, 108-125 

Mead,  Elwood,  statements  of .  88-93, 99-108 

Michigan,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Minnesota,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 

reservoirs  built  by  Government  in .  21 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77,78 

Mississippi,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for . 79-80 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Mississippi  River,  reservoirs  built  by  Gov¬ 
ernment  on  headwaters  of .  21 

Missouri,  swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Mondell,  Hon.  F.  W..  bill  introduced  by, 

discussion  of .  82-83 

bill  introduced  by,  dedicating  proceeds 
of  sales  of  public  lands  to  construc¬ 
tion  of  irrigation  works,  etc.,  text 

of .  61-62 

statements  of .  61-71,81-85 

Montana,  appropriations  proposed  for  sur¬ 
veys,  etc.,  in .  18-19 

arid-land-grant  commission  of,  powers 

of .  113 

diversion  of  waters  of  St.  Mary  River 

in  .  23 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 


INDEX. 


129 


Page. 

Montana,  reservoirs  proposed  in,  cost  and 


capacity  of . 30 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of 

continuing .  54 

underground  waters  in .  42 

Nebraska,  appropriation  proposed  for  drill¬ 
ing  test  well  in .  19 

artesian  test  well  in,  estimated  cost  of 

drilling .  54 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

underground  waters  in . . 38-42 

Nevada,  agricultural  development  of . 14-16 

appropriations  proposed  for  storage 

works,  etc.,  in .  18-19 

irrigation  possibilities  in . '. .  15 

population  of,  present  and  past .  14 

precious  metals  in,  production  of .  14 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoirs  proposed  in,  costand  capacity 

of . . .  28-29,30 

reservoirs  proposed  in,  text  of  bill  cov¬ 
ering  construction  of .  5-6 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of 

continuing . 54 

water  storage  and  irrigation  works  in, 

text  of  bills  providing  for .  5-7 

Nevada  and  California,  forest  reserve  in 

Truckee  River  Basin  in,  need  of . . . .  29 

segregation  of  lands  in . 29-30 

water  storage  in,  interstate  complica¬ 
tions  of .  27-2S,  100-102,  114-115 

Newell,  F.  H.,  remarks  by .  94-95,  105,106 

statements  of  .  20-30,  43-61 

New  Hampshire,  inland  commerce  in,  ap¬ 
propriations  for .  79 

New  Jersey,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for . . . . .  79,80 

Newlands,  Hon.  F.  G.,  bill  introduced  by, 
for  reclamation  of  arid  lands,  dis¬ 
cussion  of .  8-20, 

23-24, 31-35,  60-61, 85-88,  94-108, 123-124 
bill  introduced  by,  for  reclamation  of 

arid  lands,  text  of .  17-19 

bill  introduced  by,  for  storage  of  water 

on  Humboldt  River,  Nev.,  text  of. . .  5-6 

remarks  by .  33, 

37,66,67,  70,82-85,104,105, 106-107, 115, 116, 117 

statements  of .  5-20,85-88 

New  Mexico,  appropriation  proposed  for  sur¬ 
vey  in .  19 

irrigation  farms  in,  average  size  of .  7 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of. .  54 

New  York,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 

North  Carolina,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79 

North  Dakota,  appropriation  proposed  for 

mapping  underground  waters  in .  19 

canal  survey  and  mapping  underground 
waters  in,  estimated  cost  of  continu¬ 
ing  . 54 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

North  Platte  River,  Nebr.,  irrigation 

methods  along . 91 

Ohio,  inland  commerce  in,  appropriations 

for .  79,80 

77,78 


Page. 


Oklahoma,  commutation  of  homesteads  in.  87 

Oregon,  agricultural  possibilities  of .  26-27 

appropriations  proposed  for  investiga¬ 
tions  in .  19 

inland  commerce  in,  appropriations  for.  79, 80 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  sites  in,  estimated  cost  of  ex¬ 
ploration  of .  54 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

underground  waters  in,  estimated  cost 

of  continuing  examination  of .  54 

Pennsylvania,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79, 80 

Percolation.  See  Seepage. 

Pima  Indians,  facts  regarding .  75-76 

Pinchot,  Gilford,  statement  of . .  72-74 

Platte  River,  diversion  of  waters  of .  124 

Public  lands,  acreage  of .  77 

sales  of .  12, 13, 56, 80, 86-87 

Ray,  Hon.  G.  W.,  remarks  by .  89, 

115-116, 117, 118, 120 
Reclamation  fund,  text  of  bill  providing  for.  6-7 
Reclamation  of  lands,  by  foreign  govern¬ 
ments  .  78 

Reeder,  Hon.  W.  A.,  remarks  by .  39, 

41,42,102,105,120,121 
Rerio,  Nev.,  agricultural  development  in  ..  28 

Reservoir  sites  in  arid  States,  number  of. ; .  25-26 
Reservoir  surveys  completed  or  partially 

completed .  57-58 

Reservoir  surveys  in  arid  lands,  estimated 

cost  of . 58 

Reservoir  surveys,  work  accomplished  and 

amount  expended  for .  51-53 

Reservoir  surveys  and  artesian  investiga¬ 
tions,  estimated  cost  of  continuing.  53-54 
Reservoirs  built  by  Government,  location 

and  cost  of .  21 

Rhode  Island,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79 

Rio  Grande,  volume  of,  fluctuations  in  ....  90 

Riparian  rights,  discussion  of...  9-11,114-120,121 
River  and  harbor  improvements,  amounts 

expended  for .  60,79-80 

features  of .  22, 

23, 26, 33-34, 60-61,  63-64,  69,  71, 80, 84, 86 
Rock  Creek,  Nev.,  reservoir  proposed  on, 

cost  and  capacity  of .  30 

water  storage  and  irrigation  works  on, 

discussion  of .  7-8 

water  storage  and  irrigation  works  on, 

text  of  bill  providing  for .  5-6 

St.  Mary  River,  Mont.,  proposed  diversion 

of  waters  of .  23 

Sales  of  pum’ie  lands .  12, 13, 56, 80, 86-87 

%San  Carlos,  Ariz.,  reservoir  proposed  near. 

See  Gila  River. 


Seepage,  extent  and  value  of .  24-26, 


35-36, 54-55, 121-122 

Segregation  of  la  nds .  5, 6, 11, 24, 44 

Segregations,  State  desert  land,  legislation 

on .  65-66 

Semiarid  and  arid  States  and  Territories, 

list  of .  7 

South  Carolina,  inland  commerce  in,  appro¬ 
priations  for .  79, 80 

South  Dakota,  appropriation  proposed  for 
artesian  test  well  in 


swamp  lands  ceded  to 

11196—01— 


9 


19 


130 


INDEX. 


Page. 

South  Dakota,  artesian  test  well  in,  esti¬ 
mated  cost  of  drilling .  54 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

South  Platte  River,  seepage  along .  26 

Stock  raising,  features  of .  13 

Stream  measurements  by  Geological  Sur¬ 
vey,  appropriations  for .  46,48,51 

history  of .  45-46 

Swamp  lands,  cession  of,  to  various  States.  77-78 
reclamation  of,  by  States,  failure  of. ...  78 

♦  Tennessee,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

Texas,  appropriation  proposed  for  water 

storage  in  .  19 

inland  commerce  in,  appropriations  for.  79, 80 
reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of. .  54 

Tongue,  Hon.  T.  H.,  remarks  by  ..  82,117-118,119 

Toole,  Gov.  J.  K.,  cited .  Ill 

Underground  waters,  appropriations  pro¬ 
posed  for  development  of. .  17-19, 42, 53-54 
extent  and  characters  of,  in  arid  and 

semiarid  States .  37-42 

investigations  of,  and  reservoir  surveys, 

estimated  cost  of  continuing .  53-54 

Utah,  appropriations  proposed  for  investi¬ 
gations  in .  19 

population  in  sections  of .  110 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of..  54 
Vermont,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79 


Virginia,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

Walcott,  C.  D.,  quoted .  123-125 

Washington,  appropriations  proposed  for 

investigations  in .  19 

artesian  conditions  in,  estimated  cost  of 

examination  of .  54 

inland  commerce  in,  appropriations  for.  79, 80 

public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of . .  54 

underground  waters  in .  42 

Water  conservation,  cost  of .  55 

Water  resources  of  United  States,  appropria¬ 
tions  for  investigation  of .  43-46, 49-53 

Wilson,  Hon. E.,  remarks  by.  10, 13, 14, 64,65, 89, 119 
Wilson,  Hon.  J.  F.,  bill  introduced  by,  for 
construction  of  reservoir  near  San 

Carlos,  Ariz.,  text  of . 74 >.75 

statement  of .  74-81 

Wisconsin,  inland  commerce  in,  appropria¬ 
tions  for .  79, 80 

reservoirs  constructed  by  Government 

in .  21 

swamp  lands  ceded  to .  77-78 

Wyoming,  appropriations  proposed  for  sur¬ 
veys  and  storage  works  in .  18-19 


public  lands  in,  acreage  of .  77 

reservoir  proposed  in,  cost  and  capacity 

of .  30 

reservoir  surveys  in,  estimated  cost  of. .  54 

underground  waters  in .  42 


o 


*1 


